83 posts / 0 new
Last post
Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 12:07am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] Hypothetically, would the IHP and 504 be [i]limited[/i] to what the medical/nursing/healthcare community is [i]bound[/i] to follow? Hypothetically.
I mean, [i]"safe practice"[/i] rules? no?
[/b]
Yes, I think so. Both limited [i]and raised[/i] to what the medical community is bound to follow.

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 12:10am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by Gail W:
[b] Yes, I think so. Both limited [i]and raised[/i] to what the medical community is bound to follow.
[/b]
[i](smacking myself in the forehead)[/i]
"raised". [b]Thank You[/b].
[i](smacking myself in the forehead again, just cuz I want to.[/i] smacking myself in the forehead can be that way. [i]if my foot could reach..............[/i]) [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 12:22am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b] and as long as I'm asking, hypothetically, would the IHP or 504 also be [i]limited[/i] to what any other individuals named in it are [b]bound, restricted, limited[/b] to do by "higher authorities"? [/b]
Yes, the presence of a full-time RN "binds" as well as "limits" my IHP agreement to higher medical/nursing authorities.
I'm trying to think of a way to show the practical application of your question. Does this hit it?:
Our nurse errs on the side of caution, and in her ernest efforts to protect Mariah's healthcare needs we felt that she segregated Mariah. E.g. Mariah only assigned to [i]one[/i] designated washed bus seat that isolated her from her classmates, Mariah designated to sit at a peanut-free table when other children wouldn't sit there, leaving her in isolation. This raises the question as to whether or not the school is showing "discrimination" by unfairly burdening our Mariah due to her "disability".
It would be the application of the [i]disability laws (504)[/i], not the application of nursing practices (IHP), that would protect Mariah from such "segregation".
[This message has been edited by Gail W (edited February 25, 2004).]

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 5:38am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by Gail W:
[b]
I'm trying to think of a way to show the practical application of your question. Does this hit it?:
Our nurse errs on the side of caution, and in her ernest efforts to protect Mariah's healthcare needs we felt that she segregated Mariah. E.g. Mariah only assigned to [i]one[/i] designated washed bus seat that isolated her from her classmates, Mariah designated to sit at a peanut-free table when other children wouldn't sit there, leaving her in isolation. This raises the question as to whether or not the school is showing "discrimination" by unfairly burdening our Mariah due to her "disability".
It would be the application of the [i]disability laws (504)[/i], not the application of nursing practices (IHP), that would protect Mariah from such "segregation".
[This message has been edited by Gail W (edited February 25, 2004).][/b]
Would this be where "reasonable" takes on a whole new meaning? See, for me, reasonable, is the "common ground" where all the circles co-join. Seeing that is a space they [i]share[/i]. Best as I can explain "Big Boolean Thing", or "Big Picture". [i]I may very well be wrong.[/i] It's just a guess.
I mean, would you still have the nurse as part of the "Big Picture" if you had a 504?
Disclaimer: Not offering advice in any manner or form.

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 6:09am
MommaBear's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/23/2002 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]
I mean, would you still have the nurse as part of the "Big Picture" if you had a 504?
[/b]
I mean, which do you believe is subject to the other? "Safe Practice" or "Disability Laws"?
Again, do you believe "Disability Laws" have the power to fundamentally alter "Safe Practice"? ie: Do you believe a nurse could be forced to operate in violation of her nurse practice act in order to comply with a "disability law? I mean, are "disability laws" even created that do such? Or are they created with other "laws" in mind? Again, what is "reasonable"? Gotta wonder if schools are gonna need "Ethics Committees" somewhere down the road. [i]Do they have them now?[/i] [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]
Thought of an example: [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]
The shuttle bus I ride on occasion has a space for wheelchair passengers. (I've noticed the same at several theme parks as well)
Anywhoo........... Due to the necessity of the driver being located at the front of the bus (as drivers may find themselves..........) there is not space enough to [i]accommodate[/i] the equipment to [i]restrain[/i] the wheelchair, [i]navigate[/i] the wheelchair, place the ramp [i]permitting the access of the wheelchair[/i], [i]maintain safety[/i] of the wheelchair, and wheelchair [i]itself[/i] in certain locations.
So, out of [i]necessity[/i] the wheelchair and its passenger may find themselves [i]limited[/i] to certain locations on the bus (who is to know where each person in a wheelchair may desire to sit while in transit)? Aside from altering the design of the [i]entire bus[/i] to allow a passenger in a wheelchair to [i]sit where-ever they want[/i], which possibly might eliminate seating for non-disabled passengers, a space(s) has been strategically designated. (The World being the imperfect place it is).
Passengers, disabled or not, have a place to board, sit, and access transit. Granted, one may argue alteration of design to the point altering the very roads the buses travel on, but, would that guarantee "leveling the playing field" completely?
I will note I [i]am[/i] not allowed to occupy that reserved space. But, all passengers get where they are going and essentially, that is what the bus is designed to do. Get you where you are going, no?
Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form.

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 8:44am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

MommaBear,
Earlier today, before I read your response in which you refer to [b]"Big Boolean Thing"[/b], I was thinking about you teaching your 2 bearcubs at home. I was thinking:
[i]"I bet MommaBear uses lots of ven diagrams in her teaching. I can envision her (in nursing scrubs and tennies) tossing out strings of yarn of many different colors, then dumping out a bucket full of stuff onto the table and telling her cubs [b]enthusiastically[/b]: let's have fun and make ven diagrams with all this stuff using strings! Yea!!! respond the cubs! Yaa!! they all excitedly cheer!!!"[/i]
Yes, I think it's a multi-discipline, [i]Boolean Thing[/i]. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]
Gail

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 8:58am
Gail W's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/06/2001 - 09:00

Quote:Originally posted by MommaBear:
[b]... which do you believe is subject to the other? "Safe Practice" or "Disability Laws"?
... do... "Disability Laws" have the power to fundamentally alter "Safe Practice"? ie: Do you believe a nurse could be forced to operate in violation of her nurse practice act in order to comply with a "disability law? I mean, are "disability laws" even created that do such? Or are they created with other "laws" in mind? Again, what is "reasonable"? [/b]
Interesting [i]ven[/i]. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]
How do you think these questions will be answered?
I am not a litigous person by nature, but I think that ultimately the place that these questions will be answered is in our courts of law.
Do you?

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 12:37pm
e-mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2000 - 09:00

Looking for more to add.
[url="http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/cguide.htm"]http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/cguide.htm[/url]
[url="http://www.doe.state.de.us/exceptional_child/resource.htm"]http://www.doe.state.de.us/exceptional_child/resource.htm[/url]
[This message has been edited by e-mom (edited February 25, 2004).]

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 12:44pm
e-mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2000 - 09:00

How on earth did PA pass as a disability?
[url="http://www.law.com/jsp/statearchive.jsp?type=Article&oldid=ZZZ44RVV5VC"]http://www.law.com/jsp/statearchive.jsp?type=Article&oldid=ZZZ44RVV5VC[/url]
Latex Allergy Not an ADA Disability, Federal Jury Finds
Shannon P. Duffy
The Legal Intelligencer
12-12-2001
In a verdict that is sure to grab the health care industry's attention, a federal jury found that a nurse's allergy to latex does not qualify as a disability for purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act because her symptoms can be completely controlled by simply avoiding latex and taking prescribed medications.
The Dec. 6 verdict in Scanlon v. Temple University was a victory for defense attorneys Neil J. Hamburg and JuHwon Lee of Philadelphia's Hamburg & Golden who argued that Jennifer Scanlon could easily return to work as a nurse in a non-latex environment.
In fact, during the trial, Hamburg offered Scanlon a job during his cross-examination. Although she didn't accept on the spot, Scanlon is now exploring whether the job is one she wants, according to her lawyer, William T. Wilson of Legg & Wilson in West Chester, Pa.
Just before the trial, U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacob P. Hart of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued a five-page opinion in which he denied a defense motion for summary judgment.
In the motion, Hamburg argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's 1999 decision in Sutton v. United Air Lines Inc. was fatal to Scanlon's claim because her alleged disability is completely curable.
QUESTION FOR JURY
But Judge Hart found that the case was not so easy and that the Sutton defense actually included several factual issues that should be decided by a jury.
"The problem with the application of Sutton to the situation presented here is that the pilots in Sutton could control whether they wore glasses while flying planes. Mrs. Scanlon has presented evidence that she has no such control over her environment if she leaves her house," Hart wrote.
"We believe that the plaintiff's control over the corrective measure is a proper consideration in conducting the inquiry. Hence, we do not believe Sutton is dispositive," Hart wrote.
Hart said the jury would decide "whether the limitations that Mrs. Scanlon's allergy imposes substantially limit any major life activity."
If the jury sided with Scanlon on that issue, Hart ruled that it would then go on to decide "whether latex is used in the health care profession to a sufficient degree that it substantially limits Mrs. Scanlon's ability to work in her chosen profession."
In the suit, Scanlon claimed that her latex allergy substantially limits the major life activities of breathing, sleeping, eating, working and interacting with others.
In response to the summary judgment motion, Wilson submitted testimony from Scanlon's treating doctor, who described her latex allergy as "life threatening" because of the breathing difficulty that exposure to latex causes her.
The doctor also said Scanlon's allergic reaction extended to foods that are "cross-reactive" in latex-sensitive patients, such as bananas, avocados, kiwi and chestnuts.
Scanlon's own description of her physical reaction to latex matched her doctor's. She described wheezing and struggling for breath when she comes into contact with latex, which can progress to a tightness in her chest and an anaphylactic reaction.
But Temple Hospital's lawyers argued that Scanlon's ADA claim was fatally flawed because she had no evidence that she suffers from any limitation caused by her allergy when she is in a latex-free environment.
As a result, the defense lawyers said, if Scanlon simply avoided latex, there would be no limitation on any of her "major life activities" with the possible exception of working.
As for working, the defense argued that Scanlon failed to show that her latex allergy precludes her from working in the "field" of nursing or any "class" of nursing jobs.
CREDIBILITY QUESTION
In the trial, Hamburg set out to attack Scanlon's credibility by showing that she had significantly understated her income in a 1998 bankruptcy filing.
Hamburg showed the jury that Scanlon was collecting workers' compensation benefits from Temple and was therefore earning much more than she told the bankruptcy court.
Scanlon was forced to admit on the witness stand that her bankruptcy filings had understated her income.
In an interview Wednesday, Scanlon's lawyer, Wilson, said that Hamburg "certainly did challenge her credibility at trial," but that he thinks the issue did not affect the jury's verdict.
Instead, Wilson said, jurors told the lawyers after the verdict that Scanlon's credibility issues didn't enter into their deliberations on the question of whether she suffered from a substantial impairment of a major life activity.
Hamburg said the jury's verdict was clearly an acceptance of the defense argument that Scanlon's latex allergy cannot be considered a disability since it can be completely cured by taking medication and avoiding contact with latex.

Posted on: Wed, 02/25/2004 - 12:58pm
e-mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2000 - 09:00

MB, have you seen this?
[url="http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/carsonlg.htm"]http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/carsonlg.htm[/url]
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
BETWEEN THE U.S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
AND CARSON LONG MILITARY INSTITUTE
NEW BLOOMFIELD, PENNSYLVANIA, DJ 202-63-47
I. BACKGROUND
1. The Parties to this Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") are the United States Department of Justice (

Pages

Peanut Free Store

More Articles

You already know that if you or your child has a peanut allergy you need to avoid peanut butter. Some...

There are many reasons why you may want to substitute almond flour for wheat flour in recipes. Of course, if you have a...

Are you looking for peanut-free candies as a special treat for a child with...

Do you have a child with peanut allergies and an upcoming birthday? Perhaps you'd like to bake a...

Most nut butters provide all the same benefits: an easy sandwich spread, a great dip for veggies, a fun addition to a smoothie. But not...