Diverse in diversity thinking

November 19, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
When the word diversity first comes to mind, you may think of people of different ethnicities, races, or gender. And that’s become the problem because “diversity” has become a bit stagnant in what people think makes up a diverse population and workforce. As the years have passed since diversity became a hot topic in the legal community and what firms look for to achieve, diversity has expanded to include religion, sexual orientation, and people with disabilities.

The American Bar Association just released its report from its second national conference in June on the employment of lawyers with disabilities. The ABA Commission on Mental and Physical Disability Law first conducted this conference in 2006.

The timing of this report comes just before Indiana Lawyer's Diversity in Practice event Friday. The event and awards recognize and celebrate those who have excelled in their committment to diversity in all its aspects.  

In the 99-page report from the ABA conference, participants attempt to persuade law firms to recruit, hire, and promote attorneys with disabilities as well as why attorneys with disabilities are needed in the profession. There are plenty of interesting personal stories from attorneys who are blind, in a wheel chair, or have Tourette syndrome about how law firms or other attorneys have reacted to their disabilities.

It’s true that people with disabilities make up a small percentage of the legal profession – only about 2 percent of 2007 law school graduates reported that they were disabled. A study conduced by the Minority Corporate Counsel Association this year found that around 2 percent of attorneys from the AmLaw 200 firms that responded to the survey identified themselves as disabled.

But as one speaker pointed out, everyone faces the possibility they may become disabled due to an accident or illness. Graduates with disabilities are also somewhat less likely to get jobs in private practice, according to the report.

One main reason for the conference was to encourage legal employers to sign a “Pledge for Change” and implement and promote disability diversity. The ABA says it’s important to promote disability diversity with the same level of diversity based on race, ethnicity, and gender.

The point of having a diverse workforce is to include people of differing backgrounds. This report helps to remind us that we shouldn’t consider only certain categories or the same two or three when thinking diversity. We need to be diverse in our thinking when considering diversity.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT