In Darby v. Childvine, a recent decision from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, the Court considered whether a genetic mutation can constitute a “disability” as that term is defined under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).

In that case, the employer terminated the plaintiff/then-employee Sherryl Darby two weeks after she underwent surgery for a double mastectomy.  Darby sued Childvine, claiming that she had breast cancer, was therefore disabled under the ADA, and that its termination of her employment violated the ADA.  Childvine moved to dismiss her complaint, arguing that a diagnosis of breast cancer does not automatically mean that the employee is substantially limited in a major life activity – which is, in part, how the ADA defines a disability.  In response, Darby amended her complaint, alleging that her cancer diagnosis meant that she was substantially limited in normal cell growth, which, she alleged, is a major life activity. Continue Reading