Is it a law that poly must be sold to minors?

[HarryC]

This is a question that was brought to my attention by an associate of mine.
Our company had a $99 complete sale which included cr-39 lenses. Customer wanted
the sale price for her young daughter, however she didn't want to pay the extra charge for polycarb lenses. The associate stated that this was "law" and she was forced to buy poly.
What associate didn't know was that the mother was an attorney. She scoured through the Connecticut statutes and could find no such law and demanded that we refund her money and downgrade her daughters glasses to plastic. We decided to offer her a refund for the difference and allow her to keep the poly lenses this one time with the understanding that future purchases must have poly lenses at standard cost.
This situation got me thinking. As an optician I wouldn't give a child plastic out of principal, and I have never heard of any state that had an actual written law saying that you had to offer polycarb. I would like to know if there is a state that mandates polycarbonate
to minors, and if anyone does know if Connecticut does have some form of a law.
Also, has anyone else run into a similar situation where the parent took the issue to the level that this went to?

[Striderswife]

I'm pretty sure it's not the law that they HAVE to have poly, but it is the law that the Optician has to offer it. That's where Duty to Warn comes in. We stock prism lenses at my office, and these are used primarily for children. Every time I fit them, I always say to the parent, "If these glasses were meant to be worn all the time, like out on the playground or riding bikes or whatever, we'd recommend an impact-resistant material." We make it clear that the lenses are for indoor activities, like reading, at the computer, or in class--not for horsing around with siblings, either.

Even in full-time glasses, I let the parent know we recommend poly, and while it is their choice, I promote the benefits of an impact-resistant lens. I'm really careful about my wording, what to say and what not to say.

Several years ago, in WI, we had a parent insist on GLASS lenses for his child. We let him know it was against our professional recommendation, but there was nothing preventing us from selling glass for his kid's glasses. We made sure do make lots of comments and document that fact.

[gmc]

This was addressed in Eyecare Business magazine.

http://www.eyecarebusiness.com/artic...?article=50054

While it isn't required a plaintiff's attorney could certainly make a standard of care argument. At the very least have them sign a waiver acknowledging they have been informed of the availability of impact resistant lenses.

[rbaker]

I can't think of any jurisdiction that requires the use of polycarbonate lenses with the possible exception of San Francisco, CA. Also, I don't think that "duty to warn" is a legal requirement in any state.

Why does everything have to be codified in the law. What ever hapned to common sense. If you feel that using a cetrtain product is not in your best interest - dont sell it.

[Now I See]

Probably not a Law, but a company policy. Maybe, next time the associate, manager, or the licensed-on-duty could just upgrade them @ no charge, explain to the patient's mom that it is a one-time deal done as a courtesy and put a note in the file as to why that decision was made. That way nobody gets reprimanded for double-discounts, and you guys/gals can feel assured that you sold the item that was in the best interest of the child.

[tigerlilly]

What kind of a mother is too cheap to put her kid in the safest lens choice? Seriously, if she's such an excellent attorney, surely she's got enough money that she doesn't have to haggle over a $99 glasses special. I really hate people like that, and I feel sorry for her kid/s.

To actually answer the question, I don't know if it's a law anywhere that minors get poly. Many companies have a policy mandating poly, but that's not the same as a law. Some actually go as far as refusing an order if the parent won't upgrade to poly. My current employer allows either Trivex or Poly, but that's it. Nobody ever fights it because they actually charge less than they'd charge an adult for the same lens, but if someone refused poly we'd have to decline the order.

There was a discussion here once (that I am too lazy to search, btw :D) where the usefulness of waivers was discussed. I remember some folks being adamantly against using them, claiming that it could actually be turned against you as proof of knowingly selling a risky product. I don't remember the winning side in that dogfight, but it might be an interesting read if you can find the thread.

[Flat Eric]

God bless America's legal system XXX No further need for responsible parenting or common sense when you can hire someone to sue people.

[Speed]

First they came up with this cheap, abundant, inferior materal. Hmm, visual acuity is not optomised by this. How do we get an industry that is all about improving vision to sell this stuff? Then the marketing gurus had to come up with a plan to sell it. It was all a pretty sharp plan. Only question I still have is, if Mommy is going to sue you for not putting poly on the kid, don't you think you'd better put a pair on Mommy?

[DragonLensmanWV]

God bless America's legal system XXX No further need for responsible parenting or common sense when you can hire someone to sue people.

You mean the legal system based on the UK's?

[canaanlilli]

What kind of a mother is too cheap to put her kid in the safest lens choice? Seriously, if she's such an excellent attorney, surely she's got enough money that she doesn't have to haggle over a $99 glasses special. I really hate people like that, and I feel sorry for her kid/s.

To actually answer the question, I don't know if it's a law anywhere that minors get poly. Many companies have a policy mandating poly, but that's not the same as a law. Some actually go as far as refusing an order if the parent won't upgrade to poly. My current employer allows either Trivex or Poly, but that's it. Nobody ever fights it because they actually charge less than they'd charge an adult for the same lens, but if someone refused poly we'd have to decline the order.

There was a discussion here once (that I am too lazy to search, btw :D) where the usefulness of waivers was discussed. I remember some folks being adamantly against using them, claiming that it could actually be turned against you as proof of knowingly selling a risky product. I don't remember the winning side in that dogfight, but it might be an interesting read if you can find the thread.

not sure if this is the thread you're talking about, but here is the one I have.

http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...iver-I-can-use

my input...always have parents sign waiver on plastic lenses. In Mo and Ks, it is not a law on the books to use such, but is you sell a non-impact resistant lens to a child or person who works in a hazardous field and they choose to sue you if you don't have a signed waiver of warn/consent then you are going to loose the lawsuit. Found this out the hard way.

[opticianbart]

This was addressed in Eyecare Business magazine.

http://www.eyecarebusiness.com/artic...?article=50054

sounds more like "We're not positive, but we're pretty sure that it's not."

[finefocus]

Legal, smeagle, who cares? Civil law is rarely about clear rights and wrongs, it is about that day's judgement by some judge or jury. You like exposure, is risk your raison d'etre? Put the kid in CR-39, or better yet, glass. Yes, that's all we had back in the day, but now you can be proven imprudent for using them. It's a bad idea.

[digitalrevolution]

If you are promoting a special package to minors with frame and lenses, why did you price the package with CR39 lenses in the first place?

If you are not in favor of selling the package at $99 with frame and SV CR39 lenses, why don't you add whatever the upcharge (let's pretend it is $30) to the package price and make it standard and advertise it at that. So your package is actually $129 and it's what the practice recommends and what you personally believe in.

Now you are not selling an "upgrade" and you avoided this entire argument. Just a thought.

[jimrask]

Never known so much pro-poly propaganda...
Poly might be more impact-resistant then CR-39, but still, when you drop a pair of glasses with poly, the lenses will be more scratched then CR-39, which won't break either.
I never had a client asking for poly lenses, as most people here prefer (high index) plastic lenses for the better optical qualities these lenses offer.

In Europe, poly is only used for safety-glasses for companies who are too greedy to buy quality glasses for their employees. I work in an optical store that has been around for 30 years, wich has very richly documented client charts. I never even sold poly, kids' glasses are sometimes made with CR-39 if a parent wants it cheap, but mostly it's 1.60/42 AS lenses for kids and adults alike here. We never had a kid comming back with a broken lens (occasionally happens only in rimless frames from time to time, but most kids don't wear those). Even then, these lenses are covered for breakage in the standard guaranty for 30 months here in Europe.

[Uilleann]

Never known so much pro-poly propaganda...
Poly might be more impact-resistant then CR-39, but still, when you drop a pair of glasses with poly, the lenses will be more scratched then CR-39, which won't break either.
I never had a client asking for poly lenses, as most people here prefer (high index) plastic lenses for the better optical qualities these lenses offer.

In Europe, poly is only used for safety-glasses for companies who are too greedy to buy quality glasses for their employees. I work in an optical store that has been around for 30 years, wich has very richly documented client charts. I never even sold poly, kids' glasses are sometimes made with CR-39 if a parent wants it cheap, but mostly it's 1.60/42 AS lenses for kids and adults alike here. We never had a kid comming back with a broken lens (occasionally happens only in rimless frames from time to time, but most kids don't wear those). Even then, these lenses are covered for breakage in the standard guaranty for 30 months here in Europe.

Wow. Some of us might say the same about your high index kool-aid! ;)

Poly works just fine for kids (and for millions of adults as well). It works in countless high precision and general optical applications. In the USA, it is inexpensive, comes in a huge range of stock powers from a myriad of manufactures, carries fair scratch and UV protection, is available photochromic, and many labs will warrant the pair against defects for one to two years.

Bear in mind that the US has different requirements in regards to impact than Europe. It might be possible that while your practices excellent performance with high index materials could not be as effectively implemented here. Regardless...you're doing very well there. CONGRATS!:cheers::cheers::cheers:

[tigerlilly]

My personal opinion is that kids need poly or Trivex because they're idiots. I know this because I was one once, and I have several children of my own now that I'm an adult so I see the idiocy firsthand every day. They shoot each other in the face with projectiles, throw rocks or ice-laden snowballs, play army with bb guns and paint guns, swing sticks wildly, wave around golf clubs and bats to hit different kinds of balls or just for the fun of waving it around, and they ride on various wheeled contraptions that stop suddenly and catapult them face first toward the concrete. If one kid tells another "Toss me that book/set of keys/can of soda/whatever object will break my glasses when it hits me," they do it, often with bad aim and decent force. Yes, adults do these things too, but adults have the reasoning and the knowledge to make their own judgments about the potential risk and consequences of their actions. Kids cannot, and it's our responsibility as parents and as health care providers to make the safe choice for them. Is it a massive risk to use CR-39 or high index? No, probably not, but we use poly for the same reason we use carseats, seatbelts, vaccinations and about a million other precautions.

For me, the evidence is anecdotal. I have a friend whose son lost his eye in a household accident. I also had a young patient who shot himself in the eye with a BB gun. I truly believe his poly lenses saved his eye. The cost difference with poly isn't prohibitive, and the optics aren't so drastically worse as to compromise vision, so I think it's the right choice.

[tigerlilly]

not sure if this is the thread you're talking about, but here is the one I have.

http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...iver-I-can-use

That may be it, although I thought it was an older thread. We tend to rehash things just a bit round here and my memory sucks. :D

[TLG]

I'm just curious; I have been dispensing nearly 30 years and I honestly can say that I have never seen a shattered CR39 lens. Have you? How many? I think the number is so small that it would be easy to rethink the 'value' of poly in children's eyewear.

I've seen plenty of poly lenses in low powers that were warped so badly from the fit in the frame that it had to have affected vision. Is that 'safe'?

[Oedema]

i've been practicing for only one year now, and I've already seen at least five instances in which Poly lenses saved a patient from at least a minor ocular trauma, two had the potential for penetrating injuries. However, all were adults.

[DragonLensmanWV]

I have seen some shattered and yellowed CR-39 lenses. Fortunately, most of them were not being worn at the time. I have never seen a CR-39 lens spontaneously crack. I have also seen spontaneously cracked and warped poly lenses. I still have yet to see a cracked or yellowed Trivex lens, or one broken in any way,scratched -yes, but none broken.
Most of us have seen this video from Younger Optics' site:
http://www.youngeroptics.com/impact_...Test_high.html

[mshimp]

There is no law that indicates that you have to sell poly to miners or to any one else. There is no law that says that you have to even offer poly or even to warn a patient about any material. You could even sell glass lens to a minor. However it would be irresponsible not to recommend poly to minors. I would go as far as having a store policy stating that only polycarbonate is to be used for minors (some exceptions). Not using poly is a law suit in the making.

[varmint]

I thought all lenses sold in the US were impact resistant, just some more than others. I'm wondering why there wasn't a disclaimer in the advertised sale in the first place.

[Uilleann]

Standard of care.

[KStraker]

I thought all lenses sold in the US were impact resistant, just some more than others. I'm wondering why there wasn't a disclaimer in the advertised sale in the first place.

ALL optical lenses are impact resistant regardless of the material. Even glass is tested with the drop ball. There are various levels of impact resistance. I would categorize them as standard, hi impact, and ballistic. I have seen more instances where the back side of the intact lens caused injury, than instances where the lens breaks and caused injury.

[Barry Santini]

For those Poly haters out there:

Try this:

I'll take any Rx with a 1 Diopter cyl or more, or pupil placement more than 5mm above MC, and favor an optimzed FF POLY lens over ANY other material NOT done in the same form.

Period.

B