ssdi (California)

Rant, rave, share expiences, seek comfort - this forum is a general category. If you have a legal or medical question, go to Questions and Advise.

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby Barney5 on Sat Sep 27, 2014 8:12 am

https://www.caaa.org/index.cfm?pg=SB863Upd


I like your fight Dolphines. Also, if you can get even a few others to write letters, that will also help.

I provided a link above from CAAA. It has more information about this bill. There is also a link to letters that injured workers have written to DWC forum and CAAA about hoe SB683 has affected them.

Maybe I should start another string just on SB626, to give information to injured workers who are interested in supporting this bill.

Hopefully Senator Beall will have the support to reintroduce this in January. I applaud him for tackling this issue.
Barney5
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:39 pm

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby Barney5 on Sat Sep 27, 2014 8:13 am

https://www.caaa.org/index.cfm?pg=SB863Upd


I like your fight Dolphines. Also, if you can get even a few others to write letters, that will also help.

I provided a link above from CAAA. It has more information about this bill. There is also a link to letters that injured workers have written to DWC forum and CAAA about hoe SB683 has affected them.

Maybe I should start another string just on SB626, to give information to injured workers who are interested in supporting this bill.

Hopefully Senator Beall will have the support to reintroduce this in January. I applaud him for tackling this issue.
Barney5
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:39 pm

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby dolphines on Thu Oct 02, 2014 10:45 am

I read yesterday that Gov. Brown denied SB626. It say's nothing can be done till 2015.

I bet I can send a lot of letters by then. :lol:

Brown SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
dolphines
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2012 8:16 am

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby Barney5 on Fri Oct 03, 2014 9:45 am

That is o.k. because 2015 is right around the corner. SB626 is placed on hold, due to lack of support. It can be reintroduced in January.

Dolphine's I think it is great what you are doing. Hopefully other's will follow.
Barney5
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:39 pm

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby LawAdvocate on Sun Oct 05, 2014 4:15 pm

The flaws in SB 626 would have harmed injured workers substantially. So if you think Brown sucks because of that, you need to read the full bill to see why it did not have enough support from anyone else either.

Brown bailed us out of a tough economy, so I would be kinder with my assessment of him and the laundry list left by the Arnoldator for Brown to clean up. You are where you are now thanks to Arnold.
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 938
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am

Re: ssdi (California) (California)

Postby Barney5 on Sun Oct 05, 2014 6:18 pm

LawAdvocate, VIAW and CAAA both support SB626. Can you please tell me what you mean by it would hurt injured workers? I have read the bill and that is not my opinion, however I am always interested in reading another opinion, especially if it is legislation that would hurt injured workers.


http://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB626/id/825836

SB626


1.This bill would increase the number of commission voting members to 10 by adding one voting member representing injured workers and one additional voting member representing employers, appointed by the Governor. Existing law states 8 voting members, that includes 4 voting members representing organized labor and 4 voting members representing employers.

2.This bill would delete the limitation on chiropractic, occupational therapy, and physical therapy visits per industrial injury.

3.Existing law prohibits a chiropractor from being the treating physician after the employee has received the maximum number of chiropractic visits. This bill would delete that provision.

4.Existing law does not require UR or IMR reviewer to hold a California medical license the same as the requested reviewer, and can be licensed in another state. This bill would require they hold the same CA license as the requesting doctor.

5. Existing law states IMR reviews are anonymous. The bill would delete the requirement that an independent medical review organization keep the names of the reviewers confidential in all communications with entities or individuals outside the independent medical review organization.

6.Existing law prohibits a workers' compensation administrative law judge, the appeals board, or any higher court from making a determination of medical necessity contrary to the determination of the independent medical review organization. This bill would delete that provision.

7. Existing law, with some exceptions, prohibits increases in impairment ratings for sleep dysfunction, sexual dysfunction, or psychiatric disorder, or any combination thereof, as specified. This bill would delete the prohibition on increases in impairment ratings for psychiatric disorder and would make related changes
Barney5
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:39 pm

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby LawAdvocate on Sun Oct 05, 2014 7:06 pm

Existing law generally provides for the reimbursement of medical providers for services rendered in connection with the treatment of a worker’s injury. Existing law authorizes, with some exceptions, the employee to be treated by a physician of his or her own choice or at a facility of his or her own choice after 30 days from the date the injury is reported. Existing law prohibits a chiropractor from being the treating physician after the employee has received the maximum number of chiropractic visits.

This bill would delete that prohibition.


Look up chiropractors stats on getting adequate care for injured workers it is pretty dismal. CAAA is all for this because they make money off of the PD, chiros write big PD reports that are easily impeachable and easily struck from evidence to drive up the value of the case. You cannot recover adequately with the average chiro directing and/or coordinating your care as the PTP. Not sure why VIAW would advocate for this level of stupidity. Study after study has proven you should be in the hands of a board certified medical doctor and when the treatment is pretty much complete and the bulk of the issue is pain, you should be transferred to a board certified pain management specialist. Now this is not the case for every single injury but for the bulk of the orthopedic injuries out there, 87% of the CA work comp claims have an orthopedic component.

Existing law requires that the recommended guidelines set forth in the medical treatment utilization schedule adopted by the administrative director be presumptively correct on the issue of extent and scope of medical treatment. Notwithstanding the medical treatment utilization schedule, for injuries occurring on and after January 1, 2004, an employee is entitled to no more than 24 chiropractic, 24 occupational therapy, and 24 physical therapy visits per industrial injury. This bill would delete the limitation on chiropractic, occupational therapy, and physical therapy visits per industrial injury.


Seriously, you want to be put through needless physical therapy rather than forcing the physicians to search out the correct scientifically proven protocols? Nobody treats for more than 24 visits in the non-industrial sector for any given injury unless they have been surgical or paralyzed at which time you are combating atrophy. They do the home exercises, they seek out the correct medical treatment, they don't waste their time getting buffed and rubbed with no objectifiable results. So you like being the prostitute for the work comp doctors to make a fortune? Why? That is just lazy medicine and ridiculous for an injured worker.
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 938
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby Barney5 on Sun Oct 05, 2014 9:22 pm

Thank you for your opinion on these issues.

In my opinion it would be very difficult for an IW to be authorized for more than 24 visits of PT. However for those with certain conditions that warrant PT above the 24 visits, I would like this to be an option for them. I look at physical therapy and chiropractic treatment not just as something that gets a person back to work, but for those with serious injuries, it can also help relieve the effects of an injury. I think many forget that workers compensation is to cure and relive the effects of an injury. You made a statement about atrophy. You do not need to be paralyzed to be combating atrophy.

I have to disagree with you that no one in private insurance sector receives over 24 visits of PT in private insurance.

I do agree that certain facilities and doctors took advantage of the system and gave injured workers PT if they needed it or not as a money making scam. I understand the defense side of being upset with this. I do not think it is fair to cut PT to injured workers who need it, just because some medical providers were abusing the system. We now have UR and IMR. I think getting PT approved that is not warranted would be difficult.

While I understand we are on two different sides of the fence, I respect you opinion and thank you for your response. What we both can agree upon is medical providers who use injured workers and subject them to treatments/PT that is not warranted should be stopped.
Barney5
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:39 pm

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby LawAdvocate on Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:21 pm

I outlined situations where people get more than 24 visits of PT, otherwise, no it does not exist unless you have some top of the line health plan.

We are not on two sides of the fence, I have the unregrettable privilege of having work comp injuries as well.
LawAdvocate
 
Posts: 938
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 10:55 am

Re: ssdi (California)

Postby Barney5 on Mon Oct 06, 2014 3:40 pm

Sorry to read about your injuries, and would not wish this system on anyone.
Barney5
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:39 pm

Previous

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron