Like a Fritz Lang remake, the setting for this machine-dominated tale of one dyslexic women’s fight for vindication against the U.S. Justice Department, was a four room complex called "computer operations," presided over by a computer deity known only as "The Console."
Proximity to the Console God was considered the plum assignment for novitiates, providing the most interesting, least stressful and best advancement opportunities. Computer operators were rotated through the four areas of computer section in a period of eight or nine weeks, spending about one week per cycle communing with "The Console."
Mary Bissell had transferred into Computer Operations initially assigned to the night shift. Nine months later, she transferred to the day shift. About that time she also had her first job performance evaluation in which she had been successful in three out of four areas. She had been found in need of improvement in one area—her relations with The Console.
As a result of this evaluation, she requested both extra training and extra console time. In her request, she made reference to her dyslexia and need for accommodation-extra training and practice time. She also was informed during this period that she would not be promoted to a supervisory position because she was not deemed to have the appropriate skills.
- A reading disability inconsistent with intellectual level.
- A disorder in such basic skills as decoding & comprehension.
- Results from brain abnormalities, often congenital.
When It Rains It Pours
Into this unfortunate situation stepped "Employee No. 1," sent no doubt by emissaries of "The Console" to vex and test our heroine. Nobody got along with this employee because of behavior similar to what she exhibited to Ms. Bissell. Once she had been introduced to the plaintiff Employee No. 1 treated her as she treated everyone else-like dirt. Sophisticated methods were employed to communicate disapproval, such as: bumping into the plaintiff’s chair every time she walked by. On one occasion this employee, who was African American, referred to Bissell, who was white, as the "dumbest white woman" she had ever known. This not only did not sit well with the plaintiff, it also displeased the powers behind The Console who, in a solemn proceeding, vowed to banish Employee Number 1 for a period of 14 days (ultimately reduced to seven).
Dyslexic Folks Require Extra Time and Training to Bloom
Various issues present themselves concerning the application of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to individuals with impairments such as dyslexia. People diagnosed with disorders of learning, communication and the like, present very different practical issues in the employment context than the stereotypical claimants with apparent physical disabilities. Ms. Bissell alleged that the Justice Department did not provide her sufficient training and other accommodations to perform the essential functions of her job. Further, by not providing the training, she was effectively prevented from honing her skills sufficiently to enable her to qualify for promotion. And finally, she alleged that a hostile workplace was created when her supervisors allowed the temperamentally challenged Employee No. 1, to run amok, attacking her on the basis of several politically incorrect criteria—race, gender and disability.
The matters before the Court consisted of cross motions for summary judgment, which the court decided in favor of the Justice Department. The Court, however, had no problem determining, in this case, that an employee diagnosed with dyslexia could be considered "a person with a disability" for purposes of applying the Act’s protections. Further, the Court found that she could perform the essential functions of her job (thereby approving another prong in the test of qualification for protection) although agreeing with the government that she could not demonstrate the need for extra training as an accommodation.
In the end, although she established her bona fides to be protected, Ms. Bissell couldn’t prove how the agency had failed to protect her or had otherwise discriminated against her. Supervisors had provided extra one-on-one training and attempted to deal with the ever unpopular Employee No. 1, who had, after all, established her bona fides as an equal opportunity bigot. And, the Court wouldn’t allow Ms. Bissell to yell foul because of a hypothetical claim that she wasn’t provided extra opportunities to improve her skills to level qualifying her for some other, advanced position.
 | James Seward, Ph.D. Forensic Psychologist The Forensic Panel |
Seward: In Bissell, the plaintiff claimed to be an "individual with a disability" as a result of dyslexia. This claim was supported by a neuropsychological evaluation, which was accepted by the Court. A popular notion of dyslexia is that it involves the tendency to reverse letters and/or numbers while writing. Although this can be one manifestation, dyslexia is actually a disorder characterized by difficulty reading.
This disorder has been known by a variety of terms and definitions. In the Fourth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) dyslexia is categorized as a reading disorder, a type of learning disorder. The "essential feature" of this condition is the presence of reading abilities that are significantly lower than that which would be expected based upon a person’s intelligence, age, and age-appropriate education. The DSM-IV does not specify the exact magnitude of the discrepancy necessary to trigger the diagnosis, and a variety of methods are used to evaluate it. These include differences between grade level in reading abilities and actual grade placement, differences in standard scores on psychological tests, and various statistical methods. Another work states that dyslexia "is functionally defined as a disorder in one or more of the basic skills involved in reading, including decoding (i.e., letter-word recognition, phonetic analysis) and comprehension." (Culbertson & Edmonds, 1996, p. 332). The exact definition used for legal decisions and compliance with legal mandates (including the magnitude and nature of the discrepancy between reading achievement and intellectual ability) such as school placement and right to accommodations, varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
Dyslexia results from abnormalities in the brain, specifically the left cerebral hemisphere, which plays a special role in the processing of language for most people. It is usually a developmental condition (i.e., presumably present at birth, and manifesting itself in childhood), although it can be the result of brain trauma or neurologic illness, in which case it is often referred to as an acquired dyslexia.
Symptoms of dyslexia can persist into adulthood, and manifest themselves as vocational difficulties due to trouble efficiently mastering written materials. This was one of the main issues in Bissell.
Neuropsychological assessment is crucial in establishing the diagnosis of dyslexia. The neuropsychologist should first find out the specific definition of dyslexia that is relevant to the jurisdiction or issue. Corroborating information such as academic records and interviews with third parties should be obtained, rather than merely depending on the results of testing. The results of individual and group standardized testing administered during the examinee’s school career are of special importance in establishing the presence of dyslexia. Due to legislation passed in the 1970s, a young adult who was formally diagnosed with dyslexia in school will typically have a paper trail of previous psychological assessments and individual educational plans (IEPs). Adults who completed their education prior to the 1970s are less likely to have these records. The examinee should be interviewed in depth as to the impact of this disorder on his or her life, including the presence of compensatory strategies.
Other possible explanations for the reading difficulty should be ruled out. For example, in my experience psychologists will sometimes attempt to assuage a patient’s or parents’ concerns by labeling the patient with a learning disability or dyslexia, when in fact the patient is of lower than average intellectual abilities, and his or her reading abilities are consistent with the overall level of cognitive functioning. In these cases, the correct but less socially desirable diagnosis may be Borderline Intellectual Functioning or Mild Mental Retardation. Other factors to be ruled out include lack of adequate educational opportunities, visual deficits, and psychiatric disturbance. It is also essential to rule out malingering in all forensic cases.
The neuropsychological evaluation should include standardized testing. This includes measures of intelligence, including both verbal and nonverbal abilities, measures of academic achievement, and measures of specific neuropsychological abilities. Reading is a complex, acquired skill, requiring the coordination of a variety of different cognitive processes and operations. A neuropsychological evaluation will explore the examinee’s ability to undertake the specific components of reading, such as memory, visual processing, concentration, abstract thinking, and language.
Finally, all of these sources of information—records, third party interviews, an interview with the examinee, and the results of standardized testing—should be integrated to communicate an understanding of the presence of dyslexia, its course, and the effect of this disability on the examinee’s life.
