Albert H. Taub, M.D. -- Letter 6/24/99 -- Unlawful Failure to Provide Informed Consent

TO: Albert H. Taub, M.D.
FROM: Gary Freedman
DATE: June 24, 1999
RE: Mental Disability -- Duty to Remediate -- Employability
_______________________________

Attached is a revised version of the Statement Made in Contemplation of Medical Prescription.

The revised Statement comports with the concerns you stated in writing to the D.C. Medical Board that you cannot certify facts relating to matters that occurred prior to your treatment of me.

I plan to send a copy of this statement (whether you sign it or not) to Judge Kaye Christian of the D.C. Superior Court, before whom I have an employment application pending.

As you may know, as of this week it is now federal law (under the Americans with Disabilities Act) that a disabled person may be required by his employer to remediate his disability to the point that that is feasible by medication or other means. Judge Christian, as a prospective employer, has a right to know precisely what can be remediated in my case and what cannot.

[Under Murphy v. United Parcel Service, 527 U.S. 516 (1999), an employer may require that an employee disabled per the Americans With Disabilities Act remediate his disability to the extent feasible by medical or other means.]

http://supreme.justia.com/us/527/516/

Arguably, your refusal (as a state employee) to sign the attached statement may now rise to the level of a violation of my constitutional right to obtain employment in the event a prospective employer conditions my employment on my physician delineating precisely what is medically remediable and what is not.

I may be contacting members of the U.S. Supreme Court and other members of the federal judiciary in connection with an employment application as a law clerk.