Abstract
Clearly, the human risks posed by reproductive hazards in the work place are both serious and far-reaching. An effective control strategy, then, must be one that emphasises prevention while preserving employment opportunities for the worker. It is hoped that employers will recognise the need for voluntary abatement of reproductive hazards. It must be recognised, however, that employees may need to avail themselves of legal mechanisms to encourage preventive actions. In many cases the most readily available mechanisms for preventive relief will be those created by federal statute; in other instances, private actions may be required. Legislative and statutory mechanisms include standard-setting for reproductive hazards; access to exposure and medical records; the rights of workers to individually refuse hazardous work; and antidiscrimination protection. Private actions include the court injunction; collective bargaining by unions; and suits for damages suffered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
The courts have long recognised the fact that mental and emotional trauma can grow out of physical injury, and have allowed recovery for damages for such trauma in both tort and worker compensation action. See Charles N. Miller, Recovery for psychic injuries under worker’s compensation, Case and Comment, 87, No. 5, 40 (1982), for a recent discussion of this topic. There is no reason to believe that Congress was unaware of this precedent when it passed OSHAct, and there is nothing in the language of Section 6(b) to indicate a limitation to purely physical consequences of work place exposures.
Five somewhat divergent viewpoints, all coming to this same general conclusion, are represented in the following articles and papers: Joan E. Bertin, Discrimination against women of childbearing capacity, presented at the Hastings Center, 8 January 1982; Lynn Paul Mattson, The pregnancy amendment: fetal rights and the workplace, Case and Comment, 86, No. 6, 33 (1981); Gary Z. Nothstein and Jeffrey P. Ayers, Sex-based considerations of differentiation in the workplace: exploring the biomedical interface between OSHA and Title VII 26, Villanova Law Review 239 (1981); Wendy W. Williams, Firing the woman to protect the fetus: the reconciliation of fetal protection with employment opportunity goals under Title VII, 69 The Georgetown Law Journal 641 (1981); Nina Stillman, The law in conflict: accommodating equal employment and occupational health obligations, presented at the American Occupational Health Conference, Anaheim, California, 2 May 1979; and V. Bor, Exclusionary employment practices in hazardous industries: protection or discrimination?, 5 COL. JOUR. ENV. L. 97 (1978). As noted by Ronald Bayer of the Hastings Center, underlying the Title VII furore over female exclusionary policies is ‘a recognition that the American economy so limits the possibilities of its woman workers that they would demand, as a sign of liberation, the right to share with men access to reproductive risks’. Bayer, op. cit., p. 19, supra, at note 9.
Clement Associates, Inc., Chemical Hazards to Human Reproduction, prepared for the Council on Environmental Quality (January, 1981), pp. VII-4. See also Judith S. Bollin, Genes and gender in the workplace, Occupational Health and Safety, 16 (January 1982).
See Michelle C. Mentzer, Industrial Relations Law Journal, 5(2), 247–282 (1983).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1984 The Royal Society of Medicine
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ashford, N.A. (1984). Legal Considerations of Reproductive Hazards in Industry in the United States. In: Chamberlain, G. (eds) Pregnant Women at Work. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86031-9_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86031-9_17
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-37117-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-86031-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)