zlacker

That's over the entire population, which includes the elderly. For the 18-34yo block, it's 8.3%, and you'd probably expect it even lower for ... well, the population that, to put it bluntly, succeeded in life enough to get into Stanford.

https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2024/comm/disa...

Edit: And to clarify, just to be fair, I can accept there are many things that would qualify as "a disability that the education system should care about" but which don't rise to the level of the hard binary classification of "disabled" that would show up in government stats. I'm just saying that the overall 25% figure isn't quite applicable here.

>>SilasX+(OP)
I would love to have experts look at the data of this self reported community survey vs the CDC's data.

---

To the edit, I can agree.

We are talking ultimately what ADA classifies as a dissability. Which is different from what might be needed for driving (as an example).

ADA has requirements. Doctors have their definitions. They're being met.

If a doctor abuses it, then we should be going for the doctors. As was said in another comment, while they are human and susceptible, they also are the ones with the license.