Posted on 07/09/2007 11:09:29 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
I would wonder if the HEPA laws allow a foster parent to release the medical information of a child in their temporary care to the general public by way of the folks down at the local RV Park. I wonder if it was just a casual conversation in the Park store while they got morning do-nuts and coffee.
Use the vast sources at your fingertips and find just one case of a person contracting HIV is a swimming pool.
Better yet find me scientific evidence that shows that the HIV virus can stay alive in a chlorinated environment.
I am not saying they acted wrongly. I am just saying they are ignorant for believing that a person can transmit HIV in a swimming pool.
But then again trailer park owner is most likely went to a government school.
What would be the point of me doing the footwork? You're the one who has an agenda about it. I don't have AIDS, I doubt I ever will, and if I did have it I would have the decency to not swim in public pools.
Not to mention the sheer logical impossibility of your original statement. You somehow know without a possible doubt that nobody in the history of the universe has ever contracted AIDS through non sexual swimming pool activity? Why should anyone take you seriously?
I am using scientific research to state my opinion and you are using ill-conceived conjecture to propagate your opinion.
You think this is bad, try starting a pro-vaccination thread. ;-) Kinda makes one embarrassed to be a Republican.
Another inane reply.
You are illogical.
All you guys need to do is find one case of a person being infected with HIV in a swimming poor or explain how the HIV virus can stay alive in a chlorinated environment.
Until then you are on the side of the people that still claim that earth is flat.
Absolutely.
Science is an ongoing research project. As lousy a situation as this is, I would pull my child out of a pool with a known HIV-positive child. The owner of this facility should not be made to choose between losing his business via lawsuit from the aggreived party, and losing his business due to the parents of all the other kids leaving the facility.
Do you really want to take the chance that a virus that was only discovered 25 years ago is fully understood when the life of your child is concerned?
This couple put the facility owner in an impossible, no-win situation. What choice did he have? Ruin his business today, or possibly ruin it via lawsuit loss someday down the road?
He did the only possible thing, in my opinion, and in asking for more information, he did it with both sensitivity to an innocent child, and grace. He ought to be given a medal.
Reagan80
One last time...what would be the point? You have already said that you are right with no possibility of you being wrong. I'll learn to live with your opinion.
Is there no circumstances that you might envision happening with a child who is HIV infected swimming in a public pool that might result in direct contact of bodily fluids by another person? One in which the bodily fluids come into direct contact without being exposed to clorinated water? There are several scenerios I could envision. But, then I’m not stuck of the issue of how this in someway violates this couple’s constitutional rights.
Uh, yeah, and viruses mutate to overcome biological obstacles too. You want to immerse your body in a liquid bath populated by known HIV-positive persons? If you have kids, you know that you’d personally give them a heart transplant and volunteer to die, just to keep them alive. Why risk the chance of avoidable deadly infection over a half hour of kicking in a pool?
Sorry, I don’t need to explain how HIV can stay alive in chlorine, those parents were simply asked to explain how it would not. And they could not.
No one could.
This isn’t about some political agenda, it’s about what can a small business owner do when presented with an impossible situation. I feel for the guy, and I feel for the poor two year old. Two year olds sometimes lose their bodily functions in pools; and urine and feces sometimes have occult blood present.
I think that you are the flat-earther; sorry...
Reagan80
The boy is a victim certainly, but there’s no reason to risk making even more victims. They could have brought a small, inflatable pool for him to splash around in. I don’t understand how people who have to deal with HIV are able to ignore reality.
Think of all the lawsuits that might’ve occurred if the owner had ignored the situation.
It is not a public facility. It is a privately own pool. It is not unreasonable to request proof a sick child in not a potential risk to other patrons.
Ignorance of the law is not a defense. I'm not sure how often children puke on one another in this fellow's establishment, but as I'm sure you know, vomit cannot transmit HIV.
No one is claiming ignorance of the law. Rather, in my theoretical defense, I am claiming that it is prudent and within the scope of the Americans with Disabilities act to request a doctor's opinion on the threat of contamination a (knowingly) sick child might present to other patrons. Indeed, failure to act or establish the potential risk would be a failure of the owner of the pool to provide reasonably safe accommodations for all his patrons.
That's fair. Plenty of lawyers will disagree with you, and I believe there's actually a pretty hefty amount of case law to back them up on that.
Okay, provide some examples.
Of the billions of pages of information on the Internet no one thus far on this thread has cited one case of a person being infected by HIV in a swimming pool. Not One!!!
Furthermore, HIV Cannot stay alive in a chlorinated environment.
BTW-I have been in a swimming pool where a person with HIV has been and most likely so have you and your children. I have also lived in the same house with a person with HIV. We ate dinner at the same table, shared a bathroom but did not have sex, share needles or give each other blood transfusions. Therefore, I was never at risk for contracting HIV.
Do some research and come back with some sound data instead of conjecture.
It is not my opinion, it is scientific fact.
Therefore, all persons with HIV should be banned from swimming pools because you just happen to believe that it is possible for HIV to be transmitted via chlorinated pool water.
Now find just one case where HIV was transmitted in a swimming pool without sexual contact and you will be right. Just one proven case is all I need.
Yes, all transmittable fatal diseases should be banned from public swimming pools.
Blood has the highest concentration of the HIV virus, and two-year olds get cuts and scrapes just like active children of other age groups. The foster parents could have easily made other arrangements more suited to the toddler’s age and health situation, but they chose to make a national fuss about what amounted to their unwillingness to procure a doctor’s note as requested by the owner.
I never knew all Freepers were from Alabama?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.