"I couldn't possibly fail to disagree with you less."
24 January 2007Tongue depressionI go to the dentist for three cleanings a year: this is a smidgen more than the usual recommendation, but given the generally uninspiring condition of the infrastructure — it's a toss-up as to which is receding faster, my hairline or my gums — I consider it necessary, and I would continue to consider it necessary even if said dentist did not employ a hygienist of considerable charm and only-slightly-muted hotness. It would, of course, never occur to me to make a move: she's spoken for. And I don't even live in Washington state:
Under Washington Administrative Code 246-16-020, your dental hygienist and your optician are "health care providers." This means that, under Washington Administrative Code 246-16-100, they "shall not engage, or attempt to engage, in sexual misconduct with a current patient." Sexual misconduct "includes but is not limited to" sex, kissing, "hugging . . . of a romantic . . . nature," "suggesting or discussing the possibility of a dating, sexual or romantic relationship after the professional relationship ends," "terminating a professional relationship for the purpose of dating or pursuing a romantic or sexual relationship," or "making statements regarding the patient['s] . . . body, appearance, sexual history, or sexual orientation other than for legitimate health care purposes," among many other things.
Hmmm. I probably wouldn't even be allowed to post this from Washington. And yes, I understand why they have rules like this:
Of course medical relationships offer room for various kinds of abuses. In some situations, it may be proper to interfere with people's right to marry, and their sexual and romantic autonomy, in order to prevent those abuses. We can talk about relationships between psychotherapists and clients (or ex-clients), or relationships between doctors and current patients, or other circumstances in which the risk of subtle coercion or unprofessional behavior is especially high (which is to say materially higher than the risk of subtle coercion and other harms in any sexual relationship).
But the Washington rules not only throw out the bathwater, they require you to abort the baby. (Via Dan Collins at protein wisdom.) Thanks for the link. I knew that if I posted long enough, eventually I'd get one. Posted by: Dan Collins at 8:31 AM on 24 January 2007I passed this wisdom onto the staff at the dentist's office today; they were generally bewildered. Posted by: CGHill at 6:08 PM on 30 January 2007 |