Couple: HIV 2 Year Old Barred from Pool

abcnews.go.com ^ | 07/09/07 | abc

[TornadoAlley3]

Toddler Was Denied Shower Access as Well:

A couple says their vacation was ruined when an RV park owner told them they weren't welcome after discovering their 2-year-old foster son had the HIV virus. Last week, Dick and Silvia Glover went to the Wales West RV Park in Silver Hill, Ala., with their foster son Caleb. When the boy was banned from using the pool and showers, the Glovers said they were offered an uncomfortable and painful choice: They could either keep Caleb out of the water or leave.

[kenth]

Yep, the HIV, had it gotten into the water, would be killed faster than any fecal micro-organism in the chlorinated pool water. If anything, the child was probably more at risk of infection due to other children than the other way around.

[Netizen]

Just goes to show that a few NBA players are on the same intellectual level as the population of an Alabama trailer park.

Yep, siding on the side of caution! :)

[CDHart]

I'm getting to where I wouldn't share a public pool at all. And also these hot tubs at hotels and gyms - you couldn't pay me to get into one of those things.

Carolyn

[HamiltonJay]

Clorine kills HIV on conctact, as do many common household disinfectants. If HIV was active in water 5 minutes after introduction, I highly doubt the water was chlorinated, or if it was, to the proper levels.

Fact is simply those toddlers in those swimming diapers pose far greater risk of infecting other bathers than an HIV+ person in a pool.

EColi has been spread in pools by just such things, HIV never has.

[SoldierDad]

Ever see a two year old bite somebody? Think about it!

[Netizen]

At a fitness club where I am a member the club forbids children under 14 years of age to even enter the hottub. This is not for safety reasons, but because young children tend to urinate in the water. And, children wearing diapers could also deficate in the water. This does pose a health hazard. This child is two and has was reported to have a serious virus that can be transmitted through bodily fluids. The park owner, I’d guess, is within his rights to ban this child once the condition was made public.

Exactly!

[ElectricStrawberry]

Sheer HIV ignorance run amok...

[silentreignofheroes]

HIV transmission by pool water is laughable, and fear of it is ignorant beyond belief.

From the Smartest Kid in class..

[silentreignofheroes]

I’m sure Skynrd is deeply worried,,

[Netizen]

LOL!
“We’re the gu’mmint; we’re here to hep”.

---

Yeah, we’re NOT supposed to trust the government schools, but, we’re supposed to take their word on everything else! LMAO!

[lovecraft]

I'm getting to where I wouldn't share a public pool at all.

You could cite me every piece of scientific evidence you wanted, and it would be just MY luck to catch it anyway because of random chance.

I will never win the lottery, but a billion to 1 chance of contracting a deadly disease? That's when I'd hit the proverbial jackpot.....LOL

[trisham]

No kidding. I’ll stick to the ocean, thank you.

[silentreignofheroes]

” FREE BIRD “

[BritExPatInFla]

To think of all the times your family has been ‘In contact’ with someone with HIV/Hepatitis and any of the other illnesses out there makes you statement more laughable. For every person that tells everyone they have a disease, there are 5 that don’t tell or don’t know yet.

[madprof98]

This is what actually happened:

"We weren't sure if somebody could get the virus if the child upchucked on them or from blood or what," said Ken Zadnichek, the park's owner. "We didn't know what the risk was. That's why we asked for something from their doctor or the county health department."

Dick Glover said the request for a doctor's note made it clear Caleb was unwelcome.

In other words, these loathesome old people were fishing for somebody to sue, and they found one. They knew full well that HIV+ no longer refers to just a medical condition; it refers to a protected class. That's why they went to the press instead of the doctor to solve their problem.

And do you think those two are going to adopt a toddler, HIV status or not? Look at their photo and think again.

[lovecraft]

See post #111, have a good laugh, I don’t mind. :-)

[Ouderkirk]

The park reacted as anyone who does not know the facts about HIV would. With fear and suspicion.

If the woman did not run off at the mouth about things that were no-one’s business but her own, then this whole mess would have never gotten started.

But true to form of any self-serving person, she wanted to be patted on the back for doing a good deed by trying to adopt this poor boy with HIV.

The true measure of charity is not the pat on the back from others but doing so in anonymity and from the heart.

[NoBullZone]

I don’t think so ... depite the spin on the story, the kid was not banned. The owner asked for an assurance from a competent authority about the risk involved (either to other swimmers, the child, or both). Since I doubt this guy has much chance to stay abreast of the medical literature, that seems the prudent thing to do. Safety first. NOW, if the parents had the family doctor fax a note that there was no danger, and the child was still not permitted to swin that would be another thing. But I don’t think it is a hanging offense to want assurance that someone with a deadly communicable disease will not pose a danger to themselves or others. Had he just let the kid swim, and the kid picked up a virus that his compromised immune system couldn’t fight, he could be held legally liable.

These no-win situations provided as a courtesy by your local tort attorney!

[expatguy]

You must live in a very lonely world FRiend.

BTW, Im also from Texas and I love Skynyrd

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

[Orange1998]

"I had a fiance once who made me observe five seconds’ respectful silence after “Free Bird.” Ugh."

Almost as bad as asking to marry you on the first date. You were wise to run.