The legality of using hand-over-mouth exercise for management of child behavior.

The objective of this article has been to delineate the possible legal grounds upon which a dentist may base his use of HOM and HOMAR for child behavior management. It has been pointed out that the use of HOM will not subject the dentist to liability to the patient when HOM is used properly and parental consent to treat the child is obtained. Such parental consent need not specifically identify the prospective use of HOM, because HOM is an inseparable component of the treatment of certain children. Parental consent to the treatment is informed consent to the necessary use of HOM. The use of HOMAR is more nearly objectionable legally and may result in liability of the dentist practicing in some jurisdictions, unless express parental consent to its use is obtained in advance of treatment. It must be emphasized that no reported decision of any court has indicated the legal standing of the use of HOM or HOMAR. It is hoped that this article may also be of some guidance to courts faced with the issue of the legality of a dentist's use of HOM or HOMAR. Until a court rules on the legitimacy of the use of HOM and HOMAR, there will be some uncertainty how a court will view its use. And of course, the dentist cannot avoid liability, if the dentist utilizes HOM or HOMAR in a manner inconsistent with the standard of the dental profession. Yet, despite such uncertainty, the dentist who uses HOM or HOMAR in accordance with the standard of the ordinarily prudent dentist in the locality and who obtains the requisite consent to treatment should not fear liability for battery or for malpractice. The dentist has done all his profession and his society can ask of him.