Re: Getting Medical Treatment Could Get a Lot Harder in North Carolina
I don't know, the Wilkes case is close.
If they accept a shoulder injury, do they honestly think the Commission or the Courts are going to apply the presumption to a subsequent complaint of ankle pain? No
, that is not the way it has worked. But that is the argument that the business community used to get our pro-business legislature to act on this right at the end of the session.
I think it would be on the claimant to prove his anxiety and depression was related to the original injury - that's pushing it.
The question here is - where do they draw the line?
Here's the facts I have a problem with.
1-Wilkes suffered “an abrasion on his head, three broken ribs, and injuries to his neck, back, pelvis, hip and entire left side, as well as a concussion,”
2-months later Wilkes filed a claim asking the city to pay for medical treatment of tinnitus (ringing in his ears) as well as anxiety and depression
3- "Wilkes failed to show that his anxiety and depression also were accident-related."
How's the employer supposed to prove the anxiety and depression wasn't accident-related? That's impossible.
If ""Wilkes failed to show that his anxiety and depression also were accident-related." why would the employer have to prove anything?
I could understand making the employer prove otherwise if Wilkes proved his case but to chase a dead horse is ridiculous.
I understand what you're saying though - the Parsons presumption would be OK as long as claimants and the Commission don't abuse the privilege.
Based on the Wilkes case, they need to establish boundaries to the law, not eliminate it in it's entirety.
Moderator Responses are based on my personal bias, experience and research - They do not represent the views of the admin nor may be accepted in the legal community, always consult an attorney.