Patch test and disclaimer

[Charlee-c]

I was talking to someone yesterday who said that yes you patch test but also get them to sign a disclaimer incase they have a reaction to the patch test
Does anybody else do this?

Charlotte

 

[Emily Case]

I don't see the point in that at all, a disclaimer won't stand up in court! What is the disclaimer for? The idea of a patch test is to check they don't react to the product...

Xxx

 

[joshinjune]

I think that's very belts and braces. But potentially a disclaimer could be worded to show it has been explained to the client that a patch test could cause an allergic reaction, and accordingly they gave accepted that risk as part of the procedure. This would certainly have some merit in defending a negligence claim.

However, I think the the extent to which patch tests in general are useful is open to debate since allergies can be developed over time, and even if testing negative to a patch can still go on to have an allergy during treatment. I personally don't patch (but my insurance/training provider do not require it) and I use a patented ultra sensitive adhesive. I'm comfortable with this decision as clients have a full indepth consultation to rule out any potential medical issue that might give rise to an allergy, and sign a full and thorough disclaimer confirming they have had the risks of a reaction fully explained to them.

My advice though is always to follow your manuf/training provider recommendations otherwise your likely to breach the terms of your insurance, and be found liable for negligence if sued.

 

[The Guild]

You should ask the client to sign a record card to show that they have had a patch test, but disclaimers are rarely accepted by courts or insurers.

 

[noreenoconnor]

I always think disclaimers are the sign of a guilty therapist, they know it's wrong to carry out the treatment without a patch test and the disclaimer is for there piece of mind and nothing else.

It will not stand up in court so it's useless really.

As for a disclaimer for a patch test I've never heard of that one, I do get them to fill out a client consultation form and note on it that a patch test has been performed, but think signing a disclaimer for a patch test is also fairly useless , even if they did take you to court for a reaction surely the courts view would be that you did everything you could to avoid a reaction , and that it was lucky they had the patch test so treatment could not go ahead?

 

[joshinjune]

I don't think signing a disclaimer for a patch test is useless. I don't think it's necessary, but it's certainly not useless. Particularly as you can (obviously) have a reaction from the patch test. A disclaimer is useful in any circumstance as evidence that the client has had the risks fully explained to them. What it will not do is automatically absolve the therapist of liability. Perhaps this is the confusion. I'm a lawyer, so I can assure you that anything that provides further evidence of what risk the client has understood and accepted (such as a disclaimer) is certainly NOT useless.

 

[noreenoconnor]

My client record cards do have the risks explained on them , but they do not have a disclaimer. I thought that disclaimers are useless as you can't get someone to sign away their rights?

 

[jolie69]

Would you refuse to treat a client who refused the patch test?
I have only had this once - she had regular tans elsewhere - never reacted - and I asked her to sign in form where it said patch test carried out - I wrote in that client had refused test and she signed it - will check this with insurers too I think xx

 

[joshinjune]

No, you can't get someone to sign away their rights in that you can't 'contract out' of being liable for negligence. However, where disclaimers are useful is they can provide detailed evidence of the risks being accepted by the client and are therefore useful as evidence that you have NOT been negligent. A client record card which sets out all the risks would achieve the same thing. However, in order to be useful it is not sufficient for this information to simply be on a card somewhere and given to the client - there must be evidence that it has been read by, explained to, and most importantly UNDERSTOOD by the client. As a minimum the client should sign somewhere to say they have read and understood the risks set out above, but to be completely sure you might want to ask the client to initial each paragraph or clause against each risk and THEN sign at the bottom.

Whether you are likely to be found negligent will depend on MANY factors, disclaimers as evidence of what has or has not been accepted by the client is just one of them. A court will always look at the totality of the evidence presented to it before drawing its conclusion. The more TANGIBLE (by this I mean written/documented) evidence you have that you have followed correct procedures (set out by your insurance, training provider and manufacturer), and have fully consulted with the client, will only serve to help you

I don't patch test as I have explained, but I am confident that a) my client's safety is not being compromised and b) I could stand up in a court and defend my position. But my situation is fairly unique I think owing to the particular products I use. My manufacturer/training provider has invested literally millions in R&D on the safest way to apply extensions using its particular adhesive (which as I said is an ultra sensitive formula unmatched in the UK market), and has determined following this that a full and thorough medical review (by this I mean literally 4 pages of medical, health and lifestyle questions) is more effective than a patch test for ruling out potential allergies. But in contrast I patch test for LVL as this is as per training provider and manufacturer requirements.

 

[joshinjune]

Would you refuse to treat a client who refused the patch test?
I have only had this once - she had regular tans elsewhere - never reacted - and I asked her to sign in form where it said patch test carried out - I wrote in that client had refused test and she signed it - will check this with insurers too I think xx

Oooh - this is a tricky one. I think the answer would have to be yes to be completely safe. For starters, there are different chemicals in different products which may provoke a reaction. Secondly, a reaction could occur at any time even if she has used the same products without issue, as sensitivities can build up in the body over time. Certainly, as a minimum I would want her to sign something to say this has been explained to her and she understands. It wouldn't be enough that she had just signed something to say she was refusing the patch test, and that she's aware she might have a reaction - she would have to sign something that shows she has been told specifically WHY she might still have a reaction. If it were me, I would always seek manufacturer/insurance guidance on this situation first before making a decision.

 

[Charlee-c]

I couldn't really see the point in the disclaimer but just wondered if I was missing something