{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03056768558951965, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.946969696969697, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
DIGNITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION: THE REQUIREMENT OF "REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION" IN DISABILITY LAW

In his response to Robert Hammel’s article Some Reflections on New York City’s Disability Law, the author seeks to undermine the basic assumptions underlying Hammel’s piece. The article first distinguishes preferential treatment of the disabled from providing people with disabilities the means to use resources equally (”reasonable accommodation”), and the author criticizes Hammel’s conflation of the two. The article then argues against Hammel’s depiction of New York City’s definition of disability as unnecessarily broad. Finally, the author concludes that disability statutes aim to provide equal opportunity for people with disabilities, not to provide every one of their needs, in contrast to Hammel’s observations. DIGNITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION: THE REQUIREMENT OF "REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION" IN DISABILITY LAW