- 13 -
complained about the type of x-ray equipment then in use in
petitioner’s dental practice. Moreover, prior to purchasing
those x-ray machines, petitioner had never consulted with any of
his disabled patients regarding his intention to acquire the
machines.
Essentially, petitioner was under no compulsion to purchase
the panoramic and Wehmer x-ray machines. Petitioner candidly
admits that he did not purchase either machine in order to comply
with any requirement of the ADA. Rather, petitioner purchased
the machines in order to provide all of his patients with better
dental care.
Petitioner did not make any modification to either the
panoramic or Wehmer x-ray machine for the purpose of treating any
of his disabled patients. Petitioner specifically declined to
purchase the x-ray machines with an installed patient chair.
Petitioner regards this decision as evidence of his desire to
better serve his disabled patients. In petitioner’s view, the x-
ray machines that he purchased “allow the ability to place
handicap patients in it * * * You can simply roll the wheelchair
into the machine.” However, petitioner also admits that his
“machines serve everyone” and “afford me an ability to more
readily get radiographs on [the patients].”
The panoramic and Wehmer x-ray machines are standard
machines used in the field of dentistry and are likely to be
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011