Question for the Lawyers

[saint]

I know it is technically illegal for a dentist to double glove for an HIV+ patient if they didn't do it for every other person. I have been lectrued that there have been medical lawsuits pertaining to it in which the patient won. Would it be termed discrimination under the Americans Disability Act or would there be another basis for a lawsuit?

 

[Keith 1]

I know it is technically illegal for a dentist to double glove for an HIV+ patient if they didn't do it for every other person. I know there have been medical lawsuits pertaining to it in which the patient won. Would it be termed discrimination under the Americans Disability Act or would there be another basis for a lawsuit?

this is not my area of practice (I do commercial litigation), but I do believe it would fall under the Americans with Disabilities Act. That being said, if I'm a juror, there is no way in hell I award damages against a dentist who double-gloved for a known HIV + patient.

 

[Penguinfan]

That has to be right up there with the most rediculous things I have ever heard. WTF?? Your dealing with a known HIV patient in a situation where blood may likely come into play and putting on an extra set of gloves is discrimination? Sounds like just good sense to me, hell I would probably shrink wrap myself jsut in case.

 

[saint]

Yeah from what I've read so far online it does not seem to be illegal. I guess whoever told us that in lecture a couple of years ago was incorrect. The only reason why I remember it was because I could not fathom how that could be discrimination.

 

[SixFive]

how would your patient know if you did or did not double glove with your other patients?? I think you're worrying about nothing. I would think that most people with HIV would not want their disease transmitted to a dentist.

 

[Sun Tzu]

It isnt illegal. Even if it were, there aren't any real damages.

 

[saint]

I'm not worrying about it SixFive...it came up for discussion on another board and I was curious is the lawyers in here have read anything on it.

Even with a needle-stick through latex gloves the chances are infinitely small of a transmission, and then reduced even more with anti-viral therapy. I treat every patient as if they have HIV or Hep since most won't reveal it anyways.

 

[SixFive]

I treat every patient as if they have HIV or Hep since most won't reveal it anyways.

Smart!! Me too!

 

[Sun Tzu]

Saint if you are that concerned you need to be using retractible needles anyway - thus you dont have the issue.

 

[saint]

Saint if you are that concerned you need to be using retractible needles anyway - thus you dont have the issue.

Reread my above post...no worries. It came up on another message board and I was curious if it was true.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

along the same lines would it be illegal for a proctologist to double glove for same

 

[saint]

along the same lines would it be illegal for a proctologist to double glove for same

Only if he smells his finger when he takes it out

 

[ripken8]

good one.

 

[cooz3]

whoever told you that was illegal is wrong...

of course if you denied services to these individuals that would be a problem...but to double glove is not in violation of the ADA or any state disability laws that im familiar with...

cooz

 

[loophole]

no way.

 

[RexBudler]

Only if he smells his finger when he takes it out

:scared :scared :scared