Are we crazy?

Vicki, it's nice to have you paying a visit here and to hear how well Rick is doing.

This is a less intense forum isn't it, and full of a lot more fun than most similar forums?

Disclosure:  I'm English and even more remote from the Anglo-American legal system because I'm a Scots lawyer (a Civilian, Roman-Dutch system).  So I'm in no way qualified to advise on American federal or state laws.  My thoughts are, therefore, just those of a non-naive but non-expert person.

In the domain of insurance, the watchword is good faith - we describe contracts of insurance as being 'uberrimae fidei' (of the utmost good faith) where one is under a heavy burden to volunteer any information that could have a bearing on the contract.  My feeling is that it's generally accepted that there is not as heavy a burden in the situation you and Rick are in.  If he is asked specific questions about health and fitness, he must answer truthfully, of course.  However, to a significant extent, it's for the prospective emloyer to satisfy itself that it is making the right choice, so I don't think it's necessary for you to volunteer information that would prejudice the attractive offer that I hope is soon on the table. 

It would be a different matter if you thought it likely that Rick wouldn't be able to cut it.  However, if you don't think he'd be selling them a pup (do you have the same colloquialism Statesside?  perhaps you'd say sell them a bill of goods?) and that he should be able to cope with the work, then you would be treating the employer fairly enough, without running the risk that they might be missing the right man by being scared off.   Although cancer is now so depressingly widespread, there are many who don't understand its effects well enough.  Someone on a selection panel might have their opinion tipped the wrong way by a piece of information they're not equipped to evaluate and therefore decide to err on the side of caution.

With the disclaimer that I'm not qualified to give advice on your law, I'd say that if you and Rick feel he's able to cope with the job, you should go for it and not fall over yourselves to give more information than is sought from him.

I hope I'm not leading you astray.  We have American attorneys here who can speak with more authority - iceman comes to mind at once and he is a man of the highest conscience whose values I admire (but not his spelling!).  With luck you'll soon get better-informed opinions offered to you. 

I do so hope it works out as you'd wish - you deserve a good break after all you've both been through.

Texas_wedge said:

Disclosure

Vicki, it's nice to have you paying a visit here and to hear how well Rick is doing.

This is a less intense forum isn't it, and full of a lot more fun than most similar forums?

Disclosure:  I'm English and even more remote from the Anglo-American legal system because I'm a Scots lawyer (a Civilian, Roman-Dutch system).  So I'm in no way qualified to advise on American federal or state laws.  My thoughts are, therefore, just those of a non-naive but non-expert person.

In the domain of insurance, the watchword is good faith - we describe contracts of insurance as being 'uberrimae fidei' (of the utmost good faith) where one is under a heavy burden to volunteer any information that could have a bearing on the contract.  My feeling is that it's generally accepted that there is not as heavy a burden in the situation you and Rick are in.  If he is asked specific questions about health and fitness, he must answer truthfully, of course.  However, to a significant extent, it's for the prospective emloyer to satisfy itself that it is making the right choice, so I don't think it's necessary for you to volunteer information that would prejudice the attractive offer that I hope is soon on the table. 

It would be a different matter if you thought it likely that Rick wouldn't be able to cut it.  However, if you don't think he'd be selling them a pup (do you have the same colloquialism Statesside?  perhaps you'd say sell them a bill of goods?) and that he should be able to cope with the work, then you would be treating the employer fairly enough, without running the risk that they might be missing the right man by being scared off.   Although cancer is now so depressingly widespread, there are many who don't understand its effects well enough.  Someone on a selection panel might have their opinion tipped the wrong way by a piece of information they're not equipped to evaluate and therefore decide to err on the side of caution.

With the disclaimer that I'm not qualified to give advice on your law, I'd say that if you and Rick feel he's able to cope with the job, you should go for it and not fall over yourselves to give more information than is sought from him.

I hope I'm not leading you astray.  We have American attorneys here who can speak with more authority - iceman comes to mind at once and he is a man of the highest conscience whose values I admire (but not his spelling!).  With luck you'll soon get better-informed opinions offered to you. 

I do so hope it works out as you'd wish - you deserve a good break after all you've both been through.

Even if it isn't a legal issue I should think it would be a moral one.  Just my opinion, but starting a new relationship of any kind always works better when it begins with honesty.  A new employer should respect that, I know I would.

icemantoo said:

Can he do the job?

I am an attorney, but my areas of expertice do not include hands on experience with employment law. My understanding of employment law is that any heath questions not related to whether you can do the job are off limits. Can you get a clean bill of heath as far as being able to do the job from your present doctors. If so get it. The last part is the tricky part and that is voluntary disclosure. Maybe after you have been offered the job would be the point to sit down and talk about past issues. Just my thoughts.

 

Icemantoo

I wonder about insurance coverage. That is an important factor

vtvickil said:

Right place = great info!

I knew this would be the right place to go!  Thank you all for taking the time to respond.  We too favor disclosure but not too early!  I especially like the idea of a statement of fitness from the Docs.  Not sure how eager they may be to provide one, but the way I see it they would simply be saying that Rick is fit to fullfill the duties of the job right now.  No promise of the future (and really - who could provide that anyway), no mention of he past.  The whole discussion will be a bit stange tho.  Guess you open it with a so....now that you want me, I need to tell you something....no easy way to start it but like ripping of the bandaid is simply has to be done. 

He's headed to Chicago for round 3 of the discussions next week.  Guess we'll see where this all takes us.  Its funny - after all the drama that surrounded our last move (he was diagnoses the day we moved) I am remarkably calm about this possibility of this one.  Guess if we made it through that one - we can make it through anything!!!

On a different, but related note, thanks to all of you for making this forum so relaxed and welcoming.  There are definitely times you need to "just the facts maam" approach found elsewhere but the longer we are on this road, the easier it is and its good to have others to walk and chat with.  Now if I could just remember to log in a bit more often ;-)

Hello Rick and Vicki,

I am neither an employment lawyer nor live in the States. Personally I would disclose the highlights of my medical history in writing to the potential employer's HR but only after having received the unconditional job offer. If everything works out fine - you got your dream job and you're known as an honest and transparent person. But if employer tries to terminate unfairly for any reason right away or during probation period, you have grounds for wrongful dismissal / human rights violation lawsuit.

You might want to talk to an actual legal expert. There is a "cancer" career and legal teleconference on July 25th http://csn.cancer.org/node/260489

BTW it is incredibly easy for anyone, including employers / recruiters to find out about medical history from "bread crumbs" (like first name, location, job title, oncologist's name, face picture, etc.) people leave on the internet. Especially when you're using the same user name on Twitter, eBay, Facebook, Linkedin, Pinterest and such. Unlike SmartPatients, CSN forums are tagged by google and not private.