- A surge in disability accommodations is overwhelming elite universities like Stanford and Harvard.
- The trend is driven by broadened legal definitions and eased documentation requirements.
- Wealthy students are exploiting the system for competitive advantages like extra test time.
- This creates administrative chaos and strains resources for those with genuine needs.
- A law meant to ensure equity is now worsening educational inequality.
A new academic arms race is unfolding in the hallowed halls of America’s most elite universities, and the weapon of choice is a disability diagnosis. While protections for genuinely disabled students were a hard-won victory, a staggering surge in accommodations at schools like Stanford, Amherst, and Harvard reveals a system being exploited by privilege. The numbers tell a damning story: at Stanford, 38% of undergraduates are now registered as disabled. At Amherst, it’s 34%. At Brown and Harvard, the figure exceeds 20%. This isn’t a story about rising need; it’s a story about a loophole turned into a luxury.
The roots of this explosion trace back to 2008, when Congress amended the Americans with Disabilities Act. The law’s definition of disability was broadened, and the list of major life activities it covered expanded to include “learning, reading, concentrating, thinking.” In response, universities eased documentation requirements. Where once extensive evidence was needed, now often only a doctor’s note is required to grant accommodations like extended test time.
A system strained to breaking point
The practical result is chaos. Administering exams is no longer straightforward. The University of Michigan’s dedicated testing centers frequently fill to capacity. Juan Collar, a physicist at the University of Chicago, noted that so many students now use low-distraction testing outposts that “they have become more distracting than the main classrooms.” The system is buckling under the weight of demand, straining resources meant for those with legitimate needs.
Who are these students? The data shows this phenomenon is concentrated almost exclusively at wealthy, selective four-year institutions. Research by psychology professor Robert Weis found that only 3 to 4 percent of students at public two-year colleges receive accommodations. At elite four-year schools, about half of students receiving accommodations have no record of a diagnosis prior to college. As one anonymous professor at a selective university stated, “You hear ‘students with disabilities’ and it’s not kids in wheelchairs. It’s just not. It’s rich kids getting extra time on tests.”
Gaming the gatekeepers
The incentives are clear and powerful. Extra time on high-stakes tests like the LSAT leads to higher scores. The Varsity Blues scandal exposed parents willing to pay doctors for fraudulent diagnoses to secure that edge. Beyond outright fraud, a culture has emerged where high-achieving students pathologize normal academic stress. Will Lindstrom, who directs a learning disorders center at the University of Georgia, sees students who arrive already convinced they have a disorder. “It’s almost like it’s part of their identity,” he said.
This cultural shift has turned a legal safeguard into a strategic advantage. Steven Sloman, a cognitive-science professor at Brown, argues this undermines the very purpose of education. “If we want our grades to be meaningful, they should reflect what the student is capable of,” he said. Accommodations like untimed tests, while vital for some, can confer an unfair advantage to others, creating what Collar calls a “two-speed student population.”
The ultimate irony is that a law designed to promote equity is now worsening inequality. While low-income students with real disabilities still struggle for support, the children of privilege are using the same framework to pull further ahead. Administrators are left watching the numbers climb, wondering when to say no. Paul Graham Fisher, a Stanford professor, recounted conversations with administrators asking, “What if it hits 50 or 60 percent? At what point do you just say ‘We can’t do this’?”
What we are witnessing is the corruption of a noble intent. The ADA was meant to tear down barriers, not erect new ones made of paperwork and privilege. When a label of disability becomes a common tactic for academic enhancement at the nation’s top schools, it cheapens the concept for those who truly rely on it. This isn’t about compassion; it’s about competition, and it’s a game the wealthy are rigging while everyone else watches the meaning of merit get tested right out of existence.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.
