Dr. Muehleis certainly points out a number of issues that can arise when courts engage in interpreting scientific information. I am pleased that the article clarified for him that the courts have applied a double standard when it comes to "direct threat," depending on whether it is the patient or provider who is infected. That is a key reason why, since my article was published, the ADA filed a brief supporting Spencer Waddell’s petition for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his case.
I must respectfully take issue with Dr. Muehleis, however, regarding his view that the ADA supports limiting dentists’ decision-making ability. Protecting the dentist’s right to exercise professional judgment within the context of generally accepted scientific knowledge is at the core of our policies. We fight vigorously in a variety of arenas—HIV, amalgam, our parameters of care, to name a few—to protect that right.
