The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not go far enough in providing equal access for the disabled, according to the four members of a panel on the subject last night.

The ADA imposed sweeping requirements on state and local governments, public facilities and private businesses to make their services accessible to the disabled.

Panelist Samuel Bagenstos, a lecturer at Harvard Law School, called the act "probably the most comprehensive civil rights law the federal government has enacted."

Panelists said the law has provoked opposition because of the cost sometimes involved in accommodating the disabled and difficulty determining who is disabled.

But while the panel was called "Uses and Abuses of the ADA," all four panelists tried to debunk the notion that disabled people abuse the statute.

Bagenstos said he believed that, if anything, courts have narrowed the bill too much for it to adequately protect the disabled.

"I think there's quite a lot in the argument that the ADA is abused to disagree with," said Bagenstos, who is teaching a Law School course this semester on disability law. "There's a lot of reason to believe, if anything, the courts have gone too far."

He said plaintiffs in ADA suits win in court only 8 percent of the time, as compared to 60 percent of the time in general contract lawsuits and 40 percent in tort suits.