British Columbia autistic girl turned away by dental clinic
Damn right the college backs the dentist.
He offered a perfectly tenable solution: he was prepared to have her treated under sedation. When her father refused (which was a perfectly reasonable reply), the opportunity for an ongoing dentist-patient relationship was compromised. She won't open her mouth and let the dentist and the hygienist do their work. The father won't allow his daughter to be sedated. What options are left?
Now there is a human rights question to be answered here. How far must a health professional go to accommodate the special needs of a patient? This young woman is, after all, entitled to dental care. But is dental care under sedation an unreasonable accommodation? I think it is a real question that only the Human Rights Tribunal is going to be in a position to answer.
_________________
--James
She's entitled to take advantage of available dental care, but if she refuses to participate (by not opening her mouth) that's her choice. How is this a human rights issue?
All a health professional is obliged to do is perform his services without discrimination. He is offering his services and she is refusing. Her choice.
It would help if she went in and the dentist showed her a model of the teeth and explained what he would do,then she would have a visual.Or if she could see other people getting their teeth cleaned.It would not be scary then.
_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi
You want them to force the patient's mouth open?
You refuse to see the simple fact the girl wouldn't open her mouth.
If you go to the dentist and refuse to let your mouth be cleaned/worked on, then you are wasting both your time and the dentist's time.
Well within their rights to deny her future appointments.
Agreed. Oh, and by the way, we agree on something. I should frame this thread.
If she is unable or unwilling to talk about her fears so that the dentist can reassure her, the dentist has no option but to reject her.
The dentist is in the right here. Frankly, I'd want nothing more to do with such a troublesome patient.
Now, if the patient came to him and said that she had fears that she needed to work through, I'd perfectly understand.
Last edited by Tequila on 30 Sep 2013, 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He offered a perfectly tenable solution: he was prepared to have her treated under sedation. When her father refused (which was a perfectly reasonable reply), the opportunity for an ongoing dentist-patient relationship was compromised. She won't open her mouth and let the dentist and the hygienist do their work. The father won't allow his daughter to be sedated. What options are left?
Now there is a human rights question to be answered here. How far must a health professional go to accommodate the special needs of a patient? This young woman is, after all, entitled to dental care. But is dental care under sedation an unreasonable accommodation? I think it is a real question that only the Human Rights Tribunal is going to be in a position to answer.
The College has to back one of their members if they are facing potential litigation. The underlying issue is that the girl needs dental treatment but concurrently she is unable to cope with having a drill inside her mouth. There are jaw braces that can lever a person's jaw open and if the girl can be strapped in. However if the issue is she would be emotionally disturbed by the procedure then the father should probably search for a dentist who has done this procedure without anesthesia then seek to get a local dentist who would be willing to attempt the same on his daughter.
The issue is that the dentist - or any dentist - is putting himself in danger if he used methods like that,
I wouldn't touch the two of them with a 20ft bargepole.
They most certainly do not--this is a professional licensing body, not a trade union. If a dentist is in breach of the rules of professional conduct, the college would come down on him like a ton of bricks.
The use of jaw braces and restraints is, in my view, barbaric. It is psychologically traumatic to the patient, and potentially dangerous to the dentist or hygienist. While sedation is not an ideal mode of delivery, it is vastly preferable to restraints for all parties.
I expect that the parents have been through the mill with many dentists before Dr. Choi. I imagine that they are turning to the BCHRT because there simply are no other dentists who are even willing to try to treat her without sedation.
_________________
--James
Unless the parents have a very good reason for rejecting it, I think the issue is with them.
Frankly, she needs serious help with her issues. This level of resistance to dentists is not normal or healthy.
If I were a dentist, I would never go near her.
I bet the feelings it gives are much like those that have to do with sexual assault.
They are being forced to undergo something against their will, and can't escape because they're physically tied up.
It wasn't bad,you could feel the tugging but it only lasted an hour.I had an epidural.It didn't work with my second birth,I only got numb to the knees so I had to be knocked out,then you have more problems with breathing when you wake up,you have to cough to get the fluid out of your lungs,it's not fun coughing or laughing after a section.And if you are awake you get to see the baby right away,instead of waking up groggy in a recovery room with the person next to you screaming because their knee hurts.
_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi
The dentists are trained in dentistry, not on magic. If a child is kicking, flailing and screaming and refusing to open their mouth, it is a dangerous situation. There are sharp tools that could be extremely damaging, and dentistry requires a fair amount of accuracy to fix a problem. It is the **parents'(! !! !)** responsibility to prepare the child and get them comfortable for a visit to the dentist! If they can't do it, then sedation is a must. If they refuse sedation then they are subjecting the child to torture and neglect by way of letting the kid's teeth to rot out. Not to mention the fact that tooth decay has been shown to be linked to heart problems.
My youngest son had started to get decay at the top of his two front teeth. I had to restrain him to brush his teeth and apply a topical protectant every day. He is now much better and tolerant of people going in his mouth, but it is MY responsibility as his parent to make sure that my child's dental hygiene is taken care of on a daily basis so that he doesn't have to get major surgery that rotted out teeth and jawline can necessitate. A dentist is there to fix problems *IF* the parent exhausts reasonable available options to help the kid. It doesn't sound like these parents are being reasonable.
I agree that tying her down and bracing her jaw open has more place in a Saw movie than any reality I want to be part of.
She may be partial to anaesthetics and/or sedatives OR the father doesn't want her to regularly sedated everytime she needs her teeth scaled.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Dental services representative |
03 Aug 2024, 10:17 pm |
Can The Sun Be Turned Into A Gigantic Telescope? |
16 Sep 2024, 4:09 am |
Blake's 7 and other obscure British Sci Fi |
13 Aug 2024, 4:25 pm |
British Newspapers Portrayal of Autism |
05 Sep 2024, 5:19 pm |