posted 06-01-2006 04:41 PM         

Thanks for the input!

posted 06-01-2006 07:20 PM            

We did it after she got a doctor's note saying she was fit for the test, and she signed a waiver of liability. It was a pre-employment test, and we have to make reasonable accommodations under the ADA. The alternative is to wait until after the baby born, but that puts us in the position of a doctor (by forming a medical opinion), which scares the lawyers.

I think our policy says no pregnant women will be tested, and that's the case with criminal tests, but there's no real ADA issue there. In this case, the chief decided to test at our lawyer's advice.

posted 06-02-2006 12:21 PM            

As has already been said, stress can lead to a miscarriage. Also, there are no studies that state the polygraph instrumentation does not cause complications or potential birth defects.

posted 06-02-2006 07:02 PM         

I don't think I am getting this. Each time I do the math, I come up with me having a miscarriage, caused the the stress of some attorney with bad judgement, who lives in a poorhouse. Can I borrow your slide rule and pocket protector?

Thanks

Ted

posted 06-03-2006 07:19 AM            

Ebvan,
I agree with you. In my pre-test with the pregnant woman I told her the stress argument in great detail before she signed the waiver drawn up by our attorney. In a criminal test, there would likely never be and ADA issue, though I can imagine some situations that might qualify.

I agree with your reasoning, but your not thinking completely like a lawyer. I'll skip the math(?), but here's my twisted point by illustration: A pregnant woman wants a job so desperately that she's willing to sign a waiver approved by your lawyer and her doctor will give her the medical okay to take the test (and he's scared of the same lawsuit if he gives her the okay when she's not). You still refuse. She gets so stressed over your "discrimination" she has a miscarriage.

Do you hear those footsteps? It's the process server, and he's got a little something for you.

The lawyer will not only argue you negligently induced the stress, but you kept her from getting a job just because she was pregnant. Unless you have real research to say the polygraph is more stressful than other steps in the process, e.g., the interview, your stress defense might never be able to leave your mouth. (I do agree it is probably more stressful than most steps in the process, but I have no proof that's the case. Even if it were generally, that doesn't mean it would be for everyone.)

posted 06-04-2006 07:48 AM            

Fortunately, I'm at the point in my public career where I can be a bit of a rebel. As I said in the thread about testing sexual assault victims, "I have enough time in harness to retire at any time and I keep an udated set of papers in my desk drawer."

My department may have some arguable legal responsibilty under ADA to provide a pregnant subject a pre-employment polygraph examination, BUT I DON"T. By the time the chief,city manager, and city attorney review the frightening document they will have to sign fully indemnifying me against any conceivable judgement, they will probably begin thinking of other ways to deal with the issue.

Seriously, I'm no doctor. I don't know whether or not a polygraph could really cause a stress induced miscarriage. AAPP warns conducting tests on persons who are not medically, physically, or psychologically able to be tested is unethical. Until there is definitive research one way or the other (and I don't see that happening) I intend to rely on what I was told in polygraph training. "Don't test ladies holding babies unless they can put them in the next room for the duration of the test." Liability aside, I would not want to be even remotely or partially responsible for causing a miscarriage.

Every employee at our agency who is subject to pre-employment polygraph has to serve a one year probation. I think the best course is to test them after the baby is here and they have a couple of months to recover.