Part A. The Americans with Disability Act (ADA) is a hallmark piece of civil rights legislation adopted into law by the U.S. Congress in 1990. The ADA, along with major revisions to the original statute passed in 2008, have helped to reshape both the physical landscape and the legal and moral status of the approximately 20% of Americans living with a disability. Title III of the ADA1 concerns public accommodations, and is intended to prohibit businesses that provide service to the publicincluding restaurants, hotels, stadiums, schools, movie theaters, and morefrom discriminating against individuals with disability. One place you have encountered the impact of this legislation is... in the restroom. Federal regulations2 require publicly accessible buildings to include a minimum number of ADA-compliant stalls throughout the building. These stalls are wider than standard stalls; because of this larger footprint, building contractors tend to install only the minimum number of stalls required under federal law. (Note: Because Title III applies to the buildings operators, federal law does not control the conduct of individuals using these facilities.) Assume for purposes of the questions below that you are a person not living with a disability, who is currently capable of using a standard stall: 1. Is it ever ethically permissible for a person not living with a disability to use an ADA-compliant stall? Are there circumstances when it would be unethicalthat is, ethically prohibitedfor a person not living with a disability to do so? What further facts about the situation would you want to have available to you in order to provide answers to these questions? In thinking through your reasoning, you should consider the question from the perspectives of the three ethical frameworks consequentialism deontology, and virtue ethics.