3 ms·

Similar horror story. When I went to get therapy for depression, they gave me a contract to read and sign for therapy agreement. I got to page 11 which said th

Similar horror story. When I went to get therapy for depression, they gave me a contract to read and sign for therapy agreement. I got to page 11 which said that I will not consume alcoholic beverages while under treatment at all. It seemed to be a rather overbroad ask for what I was coming for, so I objected (over their secure PM system). They tried to object that "well, you need to follow your doctor's directions because there can be interactions between the medicine and alcohol." I said "The clause doesn't say 'I will follow the psychiatrist's direction about drug interactions.' It says I will unconditionally refrain from all alcohol." Then the main doctor entered the thread and really blew my mind. He said, basically, a) no one in 5 years has objected to that clause, and b) it's common to have a clinic policy like and it's like an EULA. b) was weird because EULA's are known for being notoriously abusive. a) was weird because he seems to genuinely think it's no big deal that either 1) no one is reading that clause, or 2) all of his patients are apparently teetotalers. (I also felt it was particularly disturbing that he was exploiting the bandwagon effect to intimidate me into signing.) So I said, if you're comfortable with the clause meaning the interpretation earlier in chat, that it just means to follow directions about alcohol interactions with meds, then I'll sign, and he agreed.

papln 7y ago
> So I said, if you're comfortable with the clause meaning the interpretation earlier in chat, that it just means to follow directions about alcohol interactions with meds, then I'll sign, and he agreed. Did you document that modification in in writing or recording?
- thrpythrwaway33 7y ago
  All of this conversation was over their secure internet chat system, so it was logged that way.
  - penagwin 7y ago
    You'll need a personal copy of that conversation if this were to come up. We don't know what their retention policy is, or if they'll mysteriously be unable to find it in a court case.
    - bagacrap 7y ago
      The only court case I could imagine this coming up in is for malpractice, where op suffered serious consequences for drinking alcohol and sued bc he wasn't told not to drink. I don't think the above message chain would help him win his case.
      - penagwin 7y ago
        Yeah I figured there was relatively little legal risk here. I just wanted to point out that if your legal defense is the party at fault keeping support chat logs then you might want to rethink your legal defense :P
  - gradys 7y ago
    IANAL, but I took a commerical law class in college. I feel like I remember there being a doctrine that if there's a written contract, agreements outside of the contract don't matter. (Which is not to say that verbal contracts aren't real contracts, but that if there's also a written contract, they overrule any unwritten agreements.)
    - bloak 7y ago
      Yes, but most of the things people are talking about here are not contracts, I think, so I don't think the doctrine you're referring to would be applicable. Compare these two situations: Situation 1. There is a single document with the title "CONTRACT" signed by both parties. It starts with a list of definitions and continues with a list of things that each party promises to do. Situation 2. There is a whole pile of documents to be signed by just one of the parties, the word "contract" is not mentioned, and most of the sentences in the documents give information (warning, disclaimer, whatever) rather than express some kind of obligation. Some kind of (implicit) contract may be created in situation 2, and the documents may have some bearing on it, but the documents are clearly not "the contract". It's more like signing to receive a parcel than signing a contract.
      - pfisch 7y ago
        It is absolutely a contract. This interpretation is just your personal opinion about how the world should work, and is not based at all in reality. These forms clearly meet the legal definition of a contract.
        sjy 7y ago
        The purpose of a consent form is not usually to create a contract but to comply with a statute requiring written consent to be obtained.
      - NikolaNovak 7y ago
        ... What are you basing that on? In Canada at least that would absolutely be a contract. We must be very careful not to confuse "common sense" or "obvious" or "that's what it intuitively means to me" with "law". Lots of people do that and lots of them pay the price :-(
PovilasID 7y ago
I was in medical trial that had the same... I just did not drink a day before they took my blood. Also I am pretty sure toxicology test was not performed. It also required me to not have kids. It made sense but still sounds extreame.

papln 7y ago

> So I said, if you're comfortable with the clause meaning the interpretation earlier in chat, that it just means to follow directions about alcohol interactions with meds, then I'll sign, and he agreed. Did you document that modification in in writing or recording?

thrpythrwaway33 7y ago
All of this conversation was over their secure internet chat system, so it was logged that way.
- penagwin 7y ago
  You'll need a personal copy of that conversation if this were to come up. We don't know what their retention policy is, or if they'll mysteriously be unable to find it in a court case.
  - bagacrap 7y ago
    The only court case I could imagine this coming up in is for malpractice, where op suffered serious consequences for drinking alcohol and sued bc he wasn't told not to drink. I don't think the above message chain would help him win his case.
    - penagwin 7y ago
      Yeah I figured there was relatively little legal risk here. I just wanted to point out that if your legal defense is the party at fault keeping support chat logs then you might want to rethink your legal defense :P
- gradys 7y ago
  IANAL, but I took a commerical law class in college. I feel like I remember there being a doctrine that if there's a written contract, agreements outside of the contract don't matter. (Which is not to say that verbal contracts aren't real contracts, but that if there's also a written contract, they overrule any unwritten agreements.)
  - bloak 7y ago
    Yes, but most of the things people are talking about here are not contracts, I think, so I don't think the doctrine you're referring to would be applicable. Compare these two situations: Situation 1. There is a single document with the title "CONTRACT" signed by both parties. It starts with a list of definitions and continues with a list of things that each party promises to do. Situation 2. There is a whole pile of documents to be signed by just one of the parties, the word "contract" is not mentioned, and most of the sentences in the documents give information (warning, disclaimer, whatever) rather than express some kind of obligation. Some kind of (implicit) contract may be created in situation 2, and the documents may have some bearing on it, but the documents are clearly not "the contract". It's more like signing to receive a parcel than signing a contract.
    - pfisch 7y ago
      It is absolutely a contract. This interpretation is just your personal opinion about how the world should work, and is not based at all in reality. These forms clearly meet the legal definition of a contract.
      - sjy 7y ago
        The purpose of a consent form is not usually to create a contract but to comply with a statute requiring written consent to be obtained.
    - NikolaNovak 7y ago
      ... What are you basing that on? In Canada at least that would absolutely be a contract. We must be very careful not to confuse "common sense" or "obvious" or "that's what it intuitively means to me" with "law". Lots of people do that and lots of them pay the price :-(

PovilasID 7y ago

I was in medical trial that had the same... I just did not drink a day before they took my blood. Also I am pretty sure toxicology test was not performed. It also required me to not have kids. It made sense but still sounds extreame.