To Disclose or Not: Understanding Disability Identity in Law School Admissions
By Amy Allbright and Robert (Bob) Dinerstein
The experiences of law students with disabilities — and their choices around self-disclosure — remain underexamined. Understanding their experiences is essential to creating an inclusive and equitable legal education system, ensuring that law schools are serving all students, and helping to create over time a legal profession that better reflects and can better serve our population, including individuals with disabilities. To better understand how disability identity shapes the law school experience, in 2022, º£½ÇÉçÇø took an important step to aggregate the experiences of individuals with disabilities in the law school application and decision-making processes. º£½ÇÉçÇø surveyed first-year law students (1Ls) and issued a report. An updated report, First-Year Law School Class: A Focus on Students with Disabilities, 2023 Update, has been published based on the responses of 1Ls with disabilities for the 2023-2024 academic year.
We found most thought-provoking the data regarding respondents’ decisions whether or not to disclose their disabilities. We acknowledge that ultimately the decision to disclose is highly personal and depends on a variety of factors. Particularly noteworthy was that while the percentage of 2023 1L respondents who identified as a person with a disability was the same as 2022 1L respondents (12%), 24% of 1Ls in 2023 did not answer the question about disability at all, compared to 6% of 1Ls in 2022 — a striking 120% increase.
Why such a significant change in a one-year period? Have students’ concerns about potential disability biases or discrimination in admissions decisions increased? Do more students believe that reducing one’s identity to just one aspect — disability — ignores that they are multifaceted, embodying a multitude of characteristics, experiences, and attributes beyond any single label, and may overshadow their other qualities and experiences? Or is something else driving this change?
Of course, we cannot determine whether the significant rise in non-responses resulted from an increase in students with disabilities opting not to answer, or from students without disabilities not responding due to objections to the question — a belief that the identity was not important to negate, or other factors.
As to who disclosed their disabilities, the 2023 and 2022 data were similar. Almost half of all 1Ls with disabilities (49%) disclosed on all their law school applications. However, racially and ethnically marginalized 1Ls were more likely not to disclose their disabilities (43%) than white (37%) 1Ls.
Why is this? Many students from marginalized racial and ethnic groups may have had negative educational experiences in the past, whether due to discrimination, cultural insensitivity, or lack of support. Therefore, they may believe that that their disclosure would negatively affect their admissions chances or that they would not receive the support they need. These students may also fear that disclosing a disability will affect their eligibility for scholarships or other funding opportunities. Disclosing a disability could also compound biases and stereotypes that they already face due to their other identities. In addition, some racial and ethnic communities may perceive disabilities as a failure, weakness, and a source of shame. There also may be a lack of visible role models or mentors who share the students’ racial or ethnic backgrounds and disclose their disabilities.
Particularly noteworthy, º£½ÇÉçÇø this year collected data on disclosure by program type (full- or part-time) and law school selectivity quartile. Sixty-four percent of part-time 1Ls with disabilities disclosed their disabilities to all of the schools they applied to compared to 46% of full-time students — almost 30% (or 18 percentage-points) more. Why the significant difference?
Many part-time students are balancing work, school, and family and may be more willing to disclose to receive the accommodations they need. These students may be more comfortable and confident disclosing their disabilities in an academic setting because they have disclosed and requested accommodations at their workplace. Because part-time students are often older and have more life experiences, they may be more comfortable advocating for themselves if it helps them succeed academically.
Additionally, the data showed that the more selective the school, the less likely students with disabilities were to disclose. Compared to students who enrolled in schools in Q2, Q3, and Q4 combined, 31% more students enrolled in the top 25% highly selective law schools (Q1) chose not to disclose to any schools they applied to. Among 1Ls with disabilities who chose not to disclose to any schools they applied to — most often because they thought it would disadvantage their application — 36% subsequently enrolled in the Q1 schools, compared to those who did not disclose their disabilities on any of their applications who enrolled in schools in Q2 (18%), Q3 (28%), and Q4 (18%).
Numerous reasons may account for these findings. Students with disabilities applying to highly competitive, high-prestige law schools may be feeling intense pressure to meet high academic expectations without any assistance. These students may have a number of additional concerns:
- That schools might consider them to be less qualified than their non-disabled peers, especially if they received accommodations in the past
- That disclosing their disabilities could overshadow or undermine their identity as high achievers
- That their peers may perceive accommodations as special treatment or an unfair advantage
- That disclosure could negatively affect their chances of securing competitive internships, fellowships, or post-graduate positions
- That elite schools may be less likely to provide accommodations that require significant adjustments to teaching or testing methods
Additionally, students with disabilities may see a lack of representation by disabled students, faculty, and leaders, reinforcing the notion that the schools are not welcoming to and inclusive of them.
We are encouraged by º£½ÇÉçÇø’s initiative to survey students with disabilities, as we have not had good statistics on the number of students who identify as disabled. While there is more to be done, this is a commendable first step.
Amy Allbright, J.D., is the Staff Director for the American Bar Association Commission on Disability Rights, which works to promote the ABA's commitment to justice and the rule of law for people with mental, physical, and sensory disabilities, and to promote their full and equal participatio
Robert (Bob) Dinerstein is the Chair of the ABA Commission on Disability Rights and professor of law emeritus at American University Washington College of Law, where he taught from 1983-2023 and founded and directed the law school’s Disability Rights Law Clinic from 2005-2023.