A recent case, Wilson v. Dept. of Mental Health & Addiction Services, decided by the 6th Circuit, serves as an example.
Kelli Wilson worked as an external auditor for the Department. She suffers from a combination of psychiatric disorders, including depression, ADHD-C, general anxiety, and Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD). Occasionally, her conditions flare up, rendering her "temporarily incapacitated" and unable to perform "daily life activities" like showering or doing the dishes.
To manage her mental health issues, the Department granted Wilson intermittent FMLA leave. However, after being caught falsely claiming to have worked on days she had actually taken off, she entered a last-chance agreement, committing to adhere to attendance policies or face termination. After nearly exhausting her FMLA leave, she applied for and received short-term disability benefits, which she also exhausted. Wilson then requested an ADA accommodation but did not complete the required paperwork due to concerns about potential bias in the review process. Ultimately, the Department fired her for violating the last-chance agreement.
The 6th Circuit upheld the dismissal of Wilson's disability discrimination and failure-to-accommodate claims. The Court emphasized that it was Wilson's "voluntary withdrawal from the interactive process," not any discriminatory actions by the Department, that led to the denial of her accommodation request. "It is a critical failure by Wilson to carry her burden of providing the Department with medical documentation supporting [her] accommodation's necessity," the Court wrote. "And this failure amounts to a voluntary withdrawal that precludes her claim that the Department failed to accommodate her."
The interactive process is just that—a process requiring participation from both parties. An employee who fails to engage in the process cannot later claim disability discrimination. Put simply, one who causes their own harm cannot later sue another for the harm suffered.
Kelli Wilson worked as an external auditor for the Department. She suffers from a combination of psychiatric disorders, including depression, ADHD-C, general anxiety, and Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD). Occasionally, her conditions flare up, rendering her "temporarily incapacitated" and unable to perform "daily life activities" like showering or doing the dishes.
To manage her mental health issues, the Department granted Wilson intermittent FMLA leave. However, after being caught falsely claiming to have worked on days she had actually taken off, she entered a last-chance agreement, committing to adhere to attendance policies or face termination. After nearly exhausting her FMLA leave, she applied for and received short-term disability benefits, which she also exhausted. Wilson then requested an ADA accommodation but did not complete the required paperwork due to concerns about potential bias in the review process. Ultimately, the Department fired her for violating the last-chance agreement.
The 6th Circuit upheld the dismissal of Wilson's disability discrimination and failure-to-accommodate claims. The Court emphasized that it was Wilson's "voluntary withdrawal from the interactive process," not any discriminatory actions by the Department, that led to the denial of her accommodation request. "It is a critical failure by Wilson to carry her burden of providing the Department with medical documentation supporting [her] accommodation's necessity," the Court wrote. "And this failure amounts to a voluntary withdrawal that precludes her claim that the Department failed to accommodate her."
The interactive process is just that—a process requiring participation from both parties. An employee who fails to engage in the process cannot later claim disability discrimination. Put simply, one who causes their own harm cannot later sue another for the harm suffered.