To Badge, or Not To Badge

[Erick Lindstrom <avrel@trex.oscs.montana.edu>]

I concur that strong documentation regarding past "non-exposure" (dosimetrically
derived) is persuasive evidence to stop badging. Obviously, the prudent/cost-
effective thing to do would be to discontinue the practice of monitoring 
low risk (in terms of potential exposure) "occupationally exposed" populations. 
But then don't you open the door for some lawyer to seduce a "concerned" client
and commence to litigate!  Isn't that why we continue to monitor those groups
anyway?  Lawsuitphobia!!!

I certainly don't believe that a dosimeter will preclude a successful lawsuit. 
But it seems that we are also in the business of protecting our employers from 
the barristers (and many of our workers from risks that don't even exist).  In 
that light, wouldn't you rather have a hard-and-fast dosimetry record as 
opposed to a hat full of excuses and explainations for why you ceased 
monitoring?  

The dilema is that we can't normally do our jobs using our own good judgement 
(borne out through training and experience); we gotta adhere to the goofy 
"political correctness" that permeates our environment. 

-Erick

I better disclaim this one!
+------------------------------+
| Erick Lindstrom              |
| Radiation Safety Officer     |
| 309 Montana Hall             |
| Montana State University     |
| Bozeman, MT  59717-0244      |
| Phone: (406) 994-2108        |	
| Fax:	 (406) 994-4792        |
| avrel@TREX.oscs.montana.edu  |
+------------------------------+