Marcos De Hoyos
Texas Employment Lawyer Marcos De Hoyos

Addiction is a complex issue that affects millions of people in the United States. It is a chronic condition characterized by compulsive drug-seeking behavior and the inability to control drug use despite negative consequences. Addiction can impact all areas of a person’s life, including their relationships, work, and health.

In recent years, there has been a growing discussion about whether addiction should be considered a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA is a federal law that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all areas of public life, including employment, education, and housing. It also requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities.

However, the ADA does not specifically list addiction as a disability. Instead, it defines a disability as “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.” Major life activities include things like walking, seeing, hearing, and working. Addiction does not fall neatly into any of these categories.

Despite this, some individuals and organizations have argued that addiction should be covered under the ADA. They point to the fact that addiction is a chronic condition that can significantly impact a person’s ability to work and perform other daily activities. They also note that addiction can be caused by a variety of factors, including genetics, trauma, and environmental factors, and that it is often accompanied by other mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety.

One of the main arguments for including addiction as a disability under the ADA is that it would provide greater protections for individuals struggling with addiction. If addiction were classified as a disability, employers would be required to provide reasonable accommodations for employees with addiction, such as time off for treatment or modified work schedules. This could help individuals with addiction maintain their jobs and prevent discrimination in the workplace.

Another argument for including addiction as a disability is that it would help reduce the stigma associated with addiction. By recognizing addiction as a disability, society would be acknowledging that addiction is a legitimate medical condition that requires treatment and support. This could help reduce the shame and stigma that often prevent individuals with addiction from seeking help.

However, there are also some arguments against including addiction as a disability under the ADA. One concern is that it could create a slippery slope where any behavior that is harmful to a person’s health could be considered a disability. For example, some argue that obesity or smoking could be considered disabilities under this definition, which could put a strain on employers and the healthcare system.

Another concern is that including addiction as a disability could lead to increased drug use. Some argue that if addiction is viewed as a disability, it could send the message that drug use is acceptable or inevitable for certain individuals. This could lead to more people using drugs and potentially developing addiction.

Despite these concerns, many experts believe that addiction should be considered a disability under the ADA. They point out that addiction is a chronic condition that can significantly impact a person’s ability to work and perform daily activities. They also note that addiction is often accompanied by other mental health conditions that can further impair a person’s functioning.

Furthermore, including addiction as a disability under the ADA could help reduce the stigma associated with addiction and provide greater protections for individuals struggling with addiction. It could also encourage more employers to provide accommodations for employees with addiction, which could help prevent discrimination and promote recovery.

The question of whether addiction should be considered a disability under the ADA is a complex one. While addiction does not neatly fit into the current definition of a disability, many experts believe that it should be included due to its impact on a person’s ability to function and the potential benefits of greater protections and reduced stigma. Ultimately, the decision of whether to include addiction as a disability will require careful consideration and discussion among policymakers, advocates, and the general public.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Marcos De Hoyos Marcos De Hoyos

We asked Marcos D. De Hoyos, a Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Wiley Wheeler, P.C., to provide her sincere answers to a range of questions. After reading, you will be more more abreast with the understanding and competency that Mr.

We asked Marcos D. De Hoyos, a Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Wiley Wheeler, P.C., to provide her sincere answers to a range of questions. After reading, you will be more more abreast with the understanding and competency that Mr. De Hoyos brings.

  1. Why did you start practicing labor and employment law?

It’s fulfilling work. Employment law is one of the few areas of law where you can actually make a difference and an impact in the lives of people. One of the most rewarding feelings is knowing that the work I do each day has a meaningful impact in the community.

  1. Who is your favorite Supreme Court Justice?

Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes, Jr.

  1. What do you think is the most important part of a good case?

The lawyer. The client could have a stellar case, but without a good lawyer, that case isn’t going anywhere. You need a passionate, active, and knowledgeable lawyer to make the right decisions and ensure that the case, regardless of how viable it is, gets the shot it deserves.

  1. Besides Rob Wiley, P.C., what is the most interesting job that you have had?

While in college, I was a barista at a small, local coffeeshop, so while I argue your case, I can also make you a killer shot of espresso to boot.

  1. What skills do you value as an employment attorney?

The ability to adapt. As a lawyer, you’re constantly faced with situations that you didn’t expect or anticipate, and you have to learn to adapt to the situation as it unfolds. Persuasiveness and attentiveness are also a few skills I think are important to being successful in law.

  1. If you were not practicing labor and employment law what would you be?

In another life, I would most likely be an English or Philosophy professor.

  1. How do you market yourself differently than others?

I did not have the privilege of growing up in a family of lawyers. I was the only person in my family to earn a law degree, and I had to learn the law tooth and nail. I understand how complicated and daunting the law can be to someone who hasn’t studied it, so along with providing advocacy, I also like to make sure that clients understand the law, so that they aren’t left tackling their problems in the dark.

  1. What do you do when you’re not practicing law?

You can usually find me reading fiction or philosophy at the local coffee shop, going for a hike or run, or touring one of the many museums or art galleries in town.

  1. What’s your favorite legal TV show

Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law.

  1. Who do you most admire as a lawyer?

The client. Taking on big companies and corporations is daunting, especially when you haven’t studied law. It takes courage to take a stand and to fight for what you are owed. I really admire that about my clients. They know going in that it’s going to be tough, but they choose to fight anyway, and that takes guts.

Marcos D. De Hoyos is a Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Wiley Wheeler, P.C. He graduated from Texas A&M University with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science and Philosophy with a Minor in English. Mr. De Hoyos went on and received his law degree from Vanderbilt University.