News of a rapid increase in the number of University of California Berkeley law school students claiming disability-related accommodations is shocking, but sadly not surprising.
As with recent stories of rampant fraud of government programs in Minnesota and elsewhere, it appears that some unscrupulous individuals are taking advantage of the generous spirit of the American people to benefit themselves in ways that they do not deserve.
One analysis found that more than one-third (37.5%) of Berkeley law school students receive disability accommodations. Of those, a whopping “98% of disabled students have a primary or secondary diagnosis of ‘ADD/ADHD,’ ‘anxiety,’ or…‘depression’” — all conditions that qualify law students for extra time to complete exams.
By comparison, Berkeley’s disability rate is more than 10 times the rate at other universities and community colleges, and exceeds by a sizable margin the disability rate among the general population of senior citizens aged 65 to 74 (24.3%). For that matter, Berkeley’s percentage of students with disabilities exceeds its percentage of male students — a highly implausible scenario.
It comes as no small irony that the student body at elite law schools like Berkeley disproportionately comes from affluent backgrounds. In other circumstances or settings, some of the students receiving accommodations would likely object to arrangements that advantage “privileged” individuals.
But when it comes to their education and advancement, suddenly their woke scruples melt away, and they demand changes to make their advancement easier, even if they don’t deserve them.
As a former member of the National Council on Disability, I recognize the need that Americans with physical and/or mental disabilities have for accommodations that reflect their health-related needs. I don’t want students with bona fide physical, mental, or developmental disabilities to face unnecessary or undue obstacles to their educational advancement.
But every individual without a disability who falsely requests modifications to their coursework damages the disability community by harming social trust. Just as healthy families forego parking next to the supermarket entrance in the expectation that only physically challenged individuals will use those parking spots, so too should we expect that alterations to academic practices require a legitimate disability.
As a disability advocate, I find it outrageous that some students are effectively cheating on their exams by fraudulently requesting and receiving accommodations they do not deserve. I wouldn’t want my daughters engaging in such dishonest conduct — and I believe most parents would agree.
Like the growth of AI-written term papers, I worry that the shortcuts taken by some American students will penalize their hard-working colleagues — those who “do the right thing,” study hard, and want to pass or fail their exams and courses based on their own merits.
It’s troubling that Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of Berkeley Law, seems uninterested in policing what looks like major abuses of the disability accommodation process occurring right under his nose.
Giving everyone who asks a blanket exemption, no questions asked, doesn’t help the disability community — nor does it engender respect for the law, as any law school should do. Rather, by allowing cynicism to flourish, it undermines public support for measures designed to give individuals with disabilities a fair shot in our society.
Both individuals with disabilities and other students who get their grades the old-fashioned way — by earning them — deserve better from Berkeley Law.
The school and other universities where unusually large numbers of students have claimed accommodations should exercise reasonable oversight to ensure that students have a legitimate disability that necessitates changes to their courses.
That would be entirely consistent with the “individualized determinations” regarding disabilities required under federal law.
Since it became law in 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act has worked to integrate people with disabilities into the mainstream of our society. Berkeley law and other universities shouldn’t let it become a “cheat code” for students to pass tests and courses they otherwise might have failed.
Mary Vought is a disability advocate and a Trump presidential appointee on the National Council on Disability.
The post Some UC Berkeley law students exploiting ‘disability’ status appeared first on New York Post.
