The new EEOC regulations are an attempt to address what Congress saw as an overly narrow definition of just who was considered disabled. "Among the purposes of the ADAA is the reinstatement of a 'broad scope of protection' by expanding the definition of the term 'disability.' Congress found that persons with many types of impairments -- including epilepsy, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, major depression, and bipolar disorder -- had been unable to bring ADA claims because they were found not to meet the ADA's definition of 'disability'," the commission said in its .

"There were some really bad cases," at least from the employees' or plaintiffs' perspective, says Myra Creighton, an Atlanta-based employment attorney with . Many cases brought by employees alleging some sort of discrimination based on a disability never moved forward, as the employer would be able to successfully argue that the individual wasn't actually disabled under the ADA's provisions, and thus no discrimination based on his or her supposed disability could have occurred. What's more, if an employee could prove that his or her condition met the definition of a disability, it probably also meant that the impairment was severe enough to prevent him or her from doing the job.