Fetal Protection and Potential Liability: Judicial Application of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Disparate Impact Theory

1985 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 369-390
Author(s):  
Laurence S. Moelis

Abstract“Fetal vulnerability programs,” which are employer attempts to protect employees' unborn fetuses from harm caused by the mothers' exposure to hazardous material in the workplace, have been challenged as a form of employment discrimination. This Note analyzes the recent judicial application of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) and the disparate impact theory to fetal vulnerability cases. The Note also examines the business necessity defense's accommodation of legitimate employer interests. The Note concludes that a more potent business necessity defense, a stricter standard for evaluating alternative protective measures, and a judicial interpretation of the PDA which is more consistent with congressional intent are necessary for fair and reasonable resolution of these cases.

1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-272
Author(s):  
B.P.M

The United States District Court of Kansas, in Gudenkauf v. Stauffer, Znc.(922 F. Supp. 465 (D. Kan. 1996), granted the defendants motion for summary judgment for the plaintiff's claims of pregnancy-related discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), but the court denied a similar motion for the plaintiff's claim under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). The court found summary judgment to be appropriate for the ADA claim based on its finding that the plaintiff's pregnancy did not constitute an impairment as required by the statute; as for the FMLA claim, it determined that the defendants failure to grant the plaintiff's leave request did not violate the statute. However, the court determined that summary judgment was inappropriate for the PDA claim because of material questions of fact about whether the defendant had acted with discriminatory intent.In considering the motions for summary judgment, the court accepted the following facts as incontrovertible. Plaintiff Michaela Gudenkauf worked for the defendant Stauffer, Inc.


Affilia ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-201
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Palley

This article makes the case that social workers and social welfare advocates need to be aware of pregnancy discrimination law to better advocate for individual clients and for changes in the existing law. It is one piece of gender discrimination and inequity. This article reviews the current law around the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, including the recent holding in Young v. UPS and other relevant case law. It also reviews recent changes made by the Affordable Care Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as related state laws designed to address pregnancy discrimination.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document