logo for Temple University Press
Disabled State
Deborah Stone
Temple University Press, 1986

logo for University of Chicago Press
Mental Disorder, Work Disability, and the Law
Edited by Richard J. Bonnie and John Monahan
University of Chicago Press, 1996
A barrage of "handbooks" and "resource manuals" aimed at employers and legal practitioners on the employment rights of people with disabilities has begun to appear. Until now, however, there has been no serious book-length scholarly treatment of how mental disorder can affect work, how work can affect mental disorder, and the role of law in addressing employment discrimination based on mental rather than physical disability. In Mental Disorder, Work Disability and the Law, the editors bring together original work by leading scholars who have studied mental disorder and work disability from the fields of sociology, psychology, psychiatry, law, and economics. The authors' contributions build upon one another to create the first integrated account of the important policy issues at stake when law deals with the rights of mentally disordered citizens to work when they are able to, and to receive benefits when they are not.

This book will be of great value to scholars in law and the mental health professions and to policy makers and the administrators of disability programs.
[more]

front cover of Penchant for Prejudice
Penchant for Prejudice
Unraveling Bias in Judicial Decision-Making
Linda G. Mills
University of Michigan Press, 1999
A Penchant for Prejudice combines a detailed empirical study of the decision-making practices of judges with a sophisticated theoretical argument which exposes contemporary myths about judging and suggests methods of incorporating the inevitable bias that is detected in this and other studies. Based on a unique study of the decisions of Social Security judges, the book challenges the meaning of judicial impartiality. Linda G. Mills finds that, in practice, bias is a consistent dimension of what is considered "impartial" decision-making. The results reveal that impartiality as the legal system now defines it, is itself a form of bias, and that a historically and contextually sensitive definition of bias, one which takes account of the communities and cultures that come to be judged in the legal system, must overcome the modern dualistic notion of imparitality as the exclusion of bias in order to respond to needs of the diversity of applicants and the judges who adjudicate their claims. According to Mills, the judicial bias she found reflected in her study seems not only to essentialize and stereotype applicants but also prevents judges from engaging vulnerable claimants in a way that the legal process positively demands. A Penchant for Prejudice will be of interest to students and scholars of law, judicial decisionmaking, and discrimination. Linda G. Mills is Assistant Professor of Social Welfare and Law, University of California, Los Angeles.
[more]


Send via email Share on Facebook Share on Twitter