van der Eijk Yvette, Glantz Stanton A
Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies and Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 27;12(11):e0188188. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188188. eCollection 2017.
Using the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents Library and Congressional records, we examined the tobacco industry's involvement with the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). During legislative drafting of the ADA (1989-1990), the Tobacco Institute, the tobacco industry's lobbying and public relations arm at the time, worked with industry lawyers and civil rights groups to include smoking in the ADA's definition of "disability." Focus was on smoking as a perceived rather than actual disability so that tobacco companies could maintain that smoking is not addictive. Language that would have explicitly excluded smoking from ADA coverage was weakened or omitted. Tobacco Institute lawyers did not think the argument that smokers are "disabled" would convince the courts, so in the two years after the ADA was signed into law, the Tobacco Institute paid a lawyer to conduct media tours, seminars, and write articles to convince employers that hiring only non-smokers would violate the ADA. The ultimate goal of these activities was to deter employers from promoting a healthy, tobacco-free workforce and, more broadly, to promote the social acceptability of smoking. Employers and policy makers need to be aware that tobacco use is not protected by the ADA and should not be misled by tobacco industry efforts to insinuate otherwise.
利用真相烟草行业文件库和国会记录,我们研究了烟草行业在1990年《美国残疾人法案》(ADA)中的参与情况。在ADA的立法起草阶段(1989 - 1990年),当时烟草行业的游说和公关机构烟草研究所,与行业律师及民权组织合作,将吸烟纳入ADA中“残疾”的定义。重点在于将吸烟视为一种被认知的而非实际的残疾,以便烟草公司能够坚称吸烟并非成瘾行为。原本会明确将吸烟排除在ADA覆盖范围之外的措辞被弱化或省略。烟草研究所的律师认为吸烟者“残疾”这一论点无法说服法院,所以在ADA签署成为法律后的两年里,烟草研究所聘请一名律师进行媒体宣传、举办研讨会并撰写文章,以说服雇主们,仅雇佣不吸烟者将违反ADA。这些活动的最终目的是阻止雇主推动建立一个健康、无烟的工作场所,更广泛地说,是为了提升吸烟在社会上的可接受性。雇主和政策制定者需要意识到,烟草使用不受ADA保护,不应被烟草行业暗示相反情况的努力所误导。