Diversity and inclusion in the legal profession: disclosure of cancer and other health conditions by lawyers with disabilities and lawyers who identify as LGBTQ +

Abstract

Purpose Given the training and experience of lawyers, we assumed that a study of lawyers’ willingness to disclose disability in the workplace would provide an example of the actions of a group knowledgeable about disability law. The current study accounts for the effect of visibility of disability, onset and type of disability, and whether the lawyer has made an accommodation request. We also investigate the role of other individual characteristics, such as sexual orientation, gender identity, race/ethnicity, age, and job-related characteristics, in willingness to disclose. Methods We use data from the first phase of a longitudinal national survey of lawyers in the USA to estimate the odds of disclosing disability to co-workers, management, and clients using proportional odds models. Results Lawyers with less visible disabilities, those with mental health disabilities, and those who work for smaller organizations have lower odds of disclosing to co-workers, management, and clients as compared to their counterparts. Attorneys who have requested accommodations are more willing to disclose as compared to those who have not, but only to co-workers and management. Women are less likely than men to disclose to management and clients. However, gender is not a significant determinant of disclosure to co-workers. Older attorneys are more likely to disclose to clients, whereas attorneys with children are less likely to disclose to co-workers. Lastly, lower perceived prejudice and the presence of co-workers with disabilities are associated with higher disclosure scores, but not for all groups. Conclusions Individuals who acquired a disability at a relatively early point in life and those with more visible disabilities are more likely to disclose. However, such willingness is affected by the intersection of disability with other individual and firm-level characteristics. Implications for Cancer Survivors. The findings imply that those with less visible disabilities and with health conditions acquired later in life are less likely to disclose. The relevance of the findings is heightened by the altered work conditions and demands imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic for cancer survivors.

Four obstacles to the quality of constitutional law learning in Indonesia

“…That the quality is not principally caused by political allegiance, social class, sex, ethnicity, or educational background, but by quality learning. Deepinder Goraya, a disabled person, and other prominent people in the United State can be good and respected legal practitioners, and they come from quality and excellent processes of law education [ 81 , 82 ].…”

“…This situation might not specifically occur in Indonesia but is a global phenomenon [ 5 ]. Legal academicians should promptly respond to the rapid globalization and new economy impacted by the leap of information technology [ 6 , 7 ] and this is why legal education in Indonesia has failed.…”

Disability, workplace inclusion and organizational citizenship behavior: an exploratory study of the legal profession

“…People with disabilities who embody other marginalized identities face more complicated and nuanced challenges to employment and workplace inclusion (Blanck et al ., 2020, 2021; Hyseni et al. , 2022) than their non-marginalized counterparts.…”

“…This barrier is more burdensome for those with less visible disabilities (Blanck et al. , 2020; Hyseni et al. , 2022), and those with multiple marginalized identities (Blanck et al.…”

“…People with disabilities who embody other marginalized identities face more complicated and nuanced challenges to employment and workplace inclusion (Blanck et al, 2020(Blanck et al, , 2021Hyseni et al, 2022) than their non-marginalized counterparts. These challenges bring to light the ways disability interacts with other aspects of identity and highlight the importance of including an interactional lens that views disability as nonmonolithic.…”