Thoughts on dignity on this ADA anniversary
The following is the conclusion of a draft paper on cross-sector partnerships supporting autistic youth transitioning into competitive integrated employment. I share it here in celebration of the anniversary of the ADA being signed into law.
In his important sociological study Dignity at Work, Hodson (2001) writes that “[d]ignity is the ability to establish a sense of self-worth and self-respect and to appreciate the respect of others” (3). A few pages before that, he begins the Preface this way:
Working with dignity is a foundation for a fully realized life. Despite many denials of dignity faced daily in the workplace, people still strive to do their best, to take pride in their work, and to defend themselves against indignities from employers, and sometimes from coworkers. New challenges are constantly being created for working with dignity by the inexorable process of technological and organizational change and by the unrelenting drive of market systems for profit maximization. (xiii)
At the core of this book is the notion that dignity is inherent in every individual, and that no one else can bestow or remove that sense of meaningful self-worth. It is almost religious, this phenomenon of dignity, and yet does not require the trappings or rites so often tied to spiritual practices. Hodson recognizes the prevalence of such language in other fields of study and makes a strong case for the centrality of dignity in the study of work.
I was reminded of Hodson’s book while reviewing the draft Strategic Plan recently published by the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (2026), which includes a section on employment, workforce participation, and workplace supports (231-237). Establishing the objectives and needs for this section, the plan’s authors write that “[t]he federal objective here is to make work possible, sustainable, and meaningful for autistic people themselves” (231) and continue:
Employment is not only an economic outcome. It affects independence, daily structure, community participation, health coverage, social connection, self-determination, and long-term stability. Yet autistic people remain too often underemployed, unemployed, pushed out of work, or limited to programs that do not match their abilities.
The word “dignity” appears elsewhere in the sprawling document, but the notion is encapsulated in those just quoted. A job is never just a job – it is a conduit to the wider world and to the internal worlds of those we work beside. It is an opportunity to make meaning through collaboration and common effort; it is a means to give of ourselves for others as much as it is a transactional, contractual relationship with a faceless organization.
For more than a century, the United States has endeavored to integrate people with disabilities into society, including the workplace. For more than half a century, the country has prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of disability and mandated public and workplace integration as a civil right. Success in obtaining and maintaining competitive integrated employment remains the stated goal of the federal government, which guides the state-level agencies tasked with supporting autistic youth achieve that goal.
However, the legal framework underpinning the right of people with disabilities to live and work with dignity (ACL, 2026) is now under threat. In June of this year, the US Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a memorandum reinterpreting the Supreme Court’s decision in Olmstead (OLC, 2026). In that memo, the OLC argues that the ADA does not mandate community-based integration. But stating the claim is not the same as changing the law, even if it does portend shifting priorities across this federal administration. As the American Bar Association reminds in its response to the memo:
Although not binding on courts and without the force of law, the memo is likely to guide Executive Branch agencies, shaping federal enforcement priorities and substantially narrowing the government’s approach to investigations, compliance, and litigation under the ADA and Section 504. (2026)
Contradicting the OLC memo, the ABA response points out that it was a clear position among members of Congress when drafting the ADA that segregation and isolation are recognized forms of discrimination—lawmakers wrote as much into the statutory findings. And a majority of justices on the Supreme Court agreed.
Dignity at work requires active inclusion, and the attempt to narrow Olmstead reintroduces the risk of increased segregation and isolation of people with disabilities. Protecting the dignity of autistic youth will require not only effective cross-sector collaboration as described and recommended above, but also firm and proactive defense of the broad integration mandate that recognizes community inclusion is a civil right that our government is responsible for protecting.