There is no individualized determination by the teacher's doctor -- or the school board's -- as to any particular teacher's ability to continue at her job. The rules contain an irrebuttable presumption of physical incompetency, and that presumption applies even when the medical evidence as to the individual woman's physical status might be wholly to the contrary. (Skotzko 65).
The Court did not say what it considered an appropriate time to take leave. It instead alluded to the fact that the woman, herself, with the advice and certification of her physician, should decide when to leave and when to resume work. The Court also did not indicate whether this ruling shoud apply to private institutions. Thus, such determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis.
The one dissenting Justice Rehnquist, along with the Chief Justice, viewed the majority decision in terms of philosophical controversy over the validity of presumptions as bases of lawmaking. In his opinion, Justice Stewart "enlists the Court in another quixotic engagement in his apparently unending war on irrebuttable presumptions" (Skotzko 66-67). In other words, it was Rehnquist's consise message that a law will remedy some problems equally well for all to whom it may apply must be the basis of modern legislation. There was a time in pre-Parliament...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now