# Spinal Injury



## Brasidas (4 Feb 2009)

So my buddy was on BMQ in St Jean. After a morning ruck march, she and her course are ordered to drop their kit and roll in the snow, then proceed through the obstacle course. The obstacle course is marked closed. This is pointed out to staff, who then say to disregard the sign. They are further ordered to wear their ballistic eyewear, while several members of the platoon can't see a thing without the prescription inserts that they've yet to receive.

Buddy reaches her last station on the obstacle course, slips, falls, and cracks a vertebrae. Currently in backbrace.

She's without a computer atm, and she's a bit trusting of staff that, imo, may be out to cover their own ***. For starters, she's yet to receive a copy of any paperwork related to the incident, despite her request for the entire file. She's got no access to internet or DIN as apparently the computers she currently has access to are NS. Date of incident was 30 Jan.

Other than grab a copy of anything she can and record the incident in full, suggestions on bases she needs to cover? She's got SISIP.


----------



## Kat Stevens (4 Feb 2009)

Get her to ask the MO for copies of the CF 98 and any witness statements on her med file at her next MOs appointment, for starters.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Feb 2009)

She has to fill out a CF 98 and get memos from all of the witnesses (Course mates) who she lists on the CF 98.  The CF 98 and memos have to be made out in 6 copies, of which one is for her (Member) to keep, the remainder go to:

1.  NDHQ Attn: DCSA
2.  Member's Pers File
3.  Member
4.  Unit File
5.  Local Safety Officer
6.  Local representative JAG (if reqr'd) 

When she fills the form out, she should keep the draft copies of everything.  The CF 98 is to be typewritten.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (4 Feb 2009)

IIRC the CF-98 is supposed to be filled out/initiated by the Supervisor


----------



## George Wallace (4 Feb 2009)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> IIRC the CF-98 is supposed to be filled out/initiated by the Supervisor



Her Supervisor has access to the electronic forms and should be enough of a 'supervisor' to initiate the CF 98.  If not, the member should strive to document the event in order to submit a CF 98 when they have a competent supervisor to assist them in doing so.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (4 Feb 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Her Supervisor has access to the electronic forms and should be a supervisor and initiate the CF 98.  If not, the member should strive to document the event in order to submit a CF 98 when they have a competent supervisor to assist them in doing so.



Also the form has to be completed and forwaded to DCSA within 14 days of the injury.


----------



## Kat Stevens (4 Feb 2009)

Sorry, but my faith in the chains ability to initiate and follow up on a CF 98 is non existant.  When time came for my VAC claim as part of my 3B release, my CF 98 had magically disappeared from everywhere, UERs and Pers file included.  I had to write a memo to my CO to ask for an investigation before anyone decided my paperwork was worth tending to.  My advice is the same for anyone who gets injured: Get copies of EVERYTHING, even if you think it's not important as soon as possible, and make even more copies of them, keep them secret, keep them safe.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Feb 2009)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Also the form has to be completed and forwaded to DCSA within 14 days of the injury.



I think that this is under ideal conditions.  I just went through several rewrites of one that happened two and a half months ago.  It was for a rather minor injury that a member on a Class B had and was required for him to get treatment in the HCC.  It more or less documents the 'stupidity' to which some people in the Health Services can carry things.   He was refused treatment of a blister, unless he had a CF 98 filled out.   :


----------



## George Wallace (4 Feb 2009)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> My advice is the same for anyone who gets injured: Get copies of EVERYTHING, even if you think it's not important as soon as possible, and make even more copies of them, keep them secret, keep them safe.



This is the best advice to all members, not only for injuries, but for all your administration.  Keep your CF 98's, copies of Lve Passes, Pay statements, Posting Messages, PERs and PDRs, Clothing Issue Docs, etc.  If you don't create your own Personal Filing system, you will get caught having or not turning in Kit, getting paid to much or too little, or perhaps as Kat found out, trying to make a claim, and having no documentation to back it up.  I know people who made claims for injuries, and had to track down friends who were with them at the time of the injury twenty years after the fact.  Memories fade.  If you have copies of the docs, then you have some sort of back up to your claim and you don't have to try and get witness statements years later.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (4 Feb 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I think that this is under ideal conditions.  I just went through several rewrites of one that happened two and a half months ago.  It was for a rather minor injury that a member on a Class B had and was required for him to get treatment in the HCC.  It more or less documents the 'stupidity' to which some people in the Health Services can carry things.   He was refused treatment of a blister, unless he had a CF 98 filled out.   :



Now that makes no sense at all ....... hot needle would take care of the blister  ;D


----------



## Rifleman62 (4 Feb 2009)

Extract from a Bde Risk Management Instruction:

*ACCIDENT/INCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS*

18.	Commanding Officers shall insure that all accident/incident are investigated and documented using the DND 663 GENERAL SAFETY HAZARDOUS OCCURRENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT (HAZOR). The DND 663 is used to identify recommendations to prevent re-occurrence and to record remedial action taken. 

19.	A DND 663 is completed electronically or in hardcopy, at Annex I, for the following:

a.	Accident, (Non-disabling, disabling and fatality); Incident; Contamination; Ergonomic; Exposure; Hazardous Condition; Spill/Release; and Other Types: Vehicle/Equipment Accident (The DND 663 is used to capture the injury and any days lost/restricted workdays) Violent Act (injuries inflicted on purpose by another person, self-inflicted injuries, or attempted suicides) Dangerous Occurrence (a serious accident that resulted in death, fire/explosion, loss of consciousness, multiple injuries, emergency procedure, or involved a pressure vessel or elevating device.)

20.  	All incidents of injuries, exposure, or suspected exposure to a toxic substance will be recorded ASAP on a CF 98 REPORT ON INJURIES AND EXPOSURE TO TOXIC SUBSTANCES, at Annex J. The CF 98 is used to report these injuries, and to record evidence that will be useful should the member suffer a disability and an application is made for a pension under the Pension Act.


*								          
CF 98 REPORT OF INJURIES AND EXPOSURE
TO TOXIC SUBSTANCES * Template

GENERAL

1.	All incidents of injuries, exposure, or suspected exposure to a toxic substance will be recorded ASAP on a CF 98 REPORT ON INJURIES AND EXPOSURE TO TOXIC SUBSTANCES. The CF 98 is used to report these injuries, and to record evidence that will be useful should the member suffer a disability and an application is made for a pension under the Pension Act.

2.	The form CF 98 is used to permanently record injuries suffered by members of the CF.  While completion is often given lip-service, its importance cannot be overemphasized.  No matter how minor an injury may initially appear, it must be reported. A correctly completed CF 98 supports:

	a.	Veterans Affairs Canada in determining entitlement to a disability 
     	 pension under the Pension Act;
       
      	 b.	determination of entitlement to a disability compensation (Reserve 
    	  Force); 
       
    	 c.	Judge Advocate General in clarifying if there is a claim by or against 
     	 the Crown; or 
       
      	d.	the provision of useful information for the conduct of any subsequent 
      	and more detailed investigation if required.

3.	Forms should be completed in detail at the time of injury and whenever possible, must be accompanied by corroborating witness statements. 

CLARIFICATION ON THE CF 98 PROCESS

4.	 In the event of a workplace/field/authorized sports injury, it is not enough that a supervisor completes the CF 98.  A DND 663 must be completed for all accidents and incidents in accordance with the DND Safety Policy and Program.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLETION

5.	The injured member’s supervisor shall initiate the completion of the CF 98 when he/she learns about the injury, an exposure or suspected exposure or when a member requests that a CF 98 be completed.

6.	When a member on Temporary Duty is injured the host unit shall complete a 
CF 98 and distribute the CF 98 and send an information copy to the parent unit.

7.	The completed CF 98 will be forwarded to the G1, who will advise the Fmn GSO.

*									          
DND 663 GENERAL SAFETY HAZARDOUS OCCURRENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT (HAZOR) * Template

GENERAL

1.	Commanding Officers shall insure that all accident/incident are investigated and documented using the DND 663 GENERAL SAFETY HAZARDOUS OCCURRENCE INVESTIGATION REPORT (HAZOR). The DND 663 is used to identify recommendations to prevent re-occurrence and to record remedial action taken. 

2.	A DND 663 is completed electronically or in hardcopy for the following:
a.	Accident, (Non-disabling, disabling and fatality); Incident; Contamination; Ergonomic; Exposure; Hazardous Condition; Spill/Release; and Other Types: Vehicle/Equipment Accident (The DND 663 is used to capture the injury and any days lost/restricted workdays) Violent Act (injuries inflicted on purpose by another person, self-inflicted injuries, or attempted suicides) Dangerous Occurrence (a serious accident that resulted in death, fire/explosion, loss of consciousness, multiple injuries, emergency procedure, or involved a pressure vessel or elevating device.)

CLARIFICATION ON THE DND 663 PROCESS

3.	 In the event of a workplace/field/authorized sports accident or incident it is not enough that a supervisor completes the CF 98.  A DND 663 must be completed for all accidents and incidents in accordance with the DND Safety Policy and Program.

COMPLETING THE DND 663

4.	The DND 663 form with check boxes with this annex provides reminders for the investigator (Box 1 & 6) of the type and direct causes of the hazardous occurrence. Each numbered box on the form has the panels listed in BOLD print that provide guidance to which panel screen in the HRMS system the information should be entered. Once the information is entered into the HRMS system, the DND 663 can be printed, signed and distributed.

5.	It is important to have all supporting documentation, notes, diagrams, pictures, etc. placed on file with the completed DND 663 form. 

RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLETION

6.	  It is the responsibility of the Supervisor to complete the DND 663 within 14 days of the reported accident or incident.  In the event that the supervisor is unsure or 
unaware of the proper procedure for completing the form, they must consult the UGSO for correct completion. 

7.	The completed DND will be forwarded to the Fmn GSO.


*Note that you can type onto the attached CF 98 PDF and print off copies. It cannot be saved with typed info.*


----------



## Brasidas (7 Feb 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> This is the best advice to all members, not only for injuries, but for all your administration.  Keep your CF 98's, copies of Lve Passes, Pay statements, Posting Messages, PERs and PDRs, Clothing Issue Docs, etc.  If you don't create your own Personal Filing system, you will get caught having or not turning in Kit, getting paid to much or too little, or perhaps as Kat found out, trying to make a claim, and having no documentation to back it up.  I know people who made claims for injuries, and had to track down friends who were with them at the time of the injury twenty years after the fact.  Memories fade.  If you have copies of the docs, then you have some sort of back up to your claim and you don't have to try and get witness statements years later.



That was my advice to her when she told me she was enlisting in the first place.  She seems to've been making an effort, but she seems to have a hard time pushing people when they don't cough up the paper.

Sitrep:

She's repeatedly been asking for paperwork back since day 1 (30 Jan). To date, all she's gotten is the sick chits that she's held onto a carbon of.

The CF-98 was written up. The original statement said nothing about weather conditions or the sign. She says that her input on those two points was accepted, but that the effectively mandated "no prescription lenses" bit didn't make it in to the revision.

It was declared by staff that "no witness statements were needed" when she brought the matter up.

She's basicly stuck in a room in barracks, mostly crippled, with not a lot of information going on and getting a smile and nod treatment by her staff.

I've suggested that she write up a formal memo in neutral language referencing previous direct requests for paperwork, outlining which specific documents are requested and further requesting any related material, addressed to her course officer.  She feels that this might be adversarial and is giving her staff more time.

Meanwhile, she tells me that there was apparently a previous incident about a year ago, where another schmuck broke her neck under comparable conditions (ice, closed course, etc).


My experience is cya with paperwork, but a few things've come to mind beyond that:

1. It's my thought that her personally asking her (former) coursemates to write up witness statements is a damned good idea.  Given previous staff decision, I'm not sure what the fallout from that'll be though.

2. Is she entitled to take a look at this 663, or request a direct interview with the relevant investigator? She seems to've only met with her staff and MO's regarding this. 

As an aside, I'd love to see what the previous incident's report concluded ("Don't use the obstacle course when it's icy and it's already marked 'closed'"?)

3. What should she be watching out for with VAC and SISIP?  Regardless of staff comments, maybe those witness statements'll be needed with these guys?


----------



## Kat Stevens (7 Feb 2009)

If she's not getting any satisfaction within a reasonable amount of time, she is well within her rights to bump her memo one step higher.  Range control at the base can confirm that the training facility was shut down on the date in question.  Witness statements are always required for any accident report.  The MO is outside her direct chain of command, and should follow up for her, if asked.


----------



## Brasidas (7 Feb 2009)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Witness statements are always required for any accident report.



Thanks, Kat. My read is that the witness statements are those of staff alone, with a draft of her version having been written on her behalf and revised with her input. Given the foot-dragging from the staff on coughing up any paper, I'd think soliciting other witnesses' statements might be a good idea.

We're at almost eight days atm. I'll be strongly suggesting to her that she move on with that memo and asking the MO to start asking questions for her about those missing papers.


----------



## SupersonicMax (7 Feb 2009)

Sorry if this is off topic but it really makes me mad...  2 things that happened at Canadian Forces Leadership and Recruit School



			
				Brasidas said:
			
		

> [...] then proceed through the obstacle course. The obstacle course is marked closed. This is pointed out to staff, who then say to disregard the sign.



So, is that what we teach recruits now?  Disregard rules?  Usually, there are reasons why an obstacle course is closed.  It reminds me of my BOTC back in 2000.  Our platoon commander made us do the obstacle course... At night (it was, at least at the time, prohibited to do the O Course at night)...  One guy busted his knee and still suffers consequences to this day.  The said Platoon Commander got charged for other stuff that happenned on the course and is not in the CF anymore.



			
				Brasidas said:
			
		

> She's without a computer atm, and she's a bit trusting of staff that, imo, may be out to cover their own ***. For starters, she's yet to receive a copy of any paperwork related to the incident, despite her request for the entire file.



While your opinion is... an opinion, the rest of the quote shows the lack of leadership on the part of the staff.  Again, at the basic level, it's important that the recruit feel that the CF is behind them, there to help.  In that case, the staff represents the CF.  They should place the welfare of their subbordinates before their own.  If that means man up to something they didn't do right, well so be it.  It just shows character and integrity.  

If I was her, I would go one step above her and talk about what happenned that day, and following the accident.  This is unnacceptable, especially at the Basic level.


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Feb 2009)

SupersonicMax you are 100% correct. The problem is, if you buck the system at any level, especially at a lower level, you lose.

This sounds like a cover up to me. The staff disobeyed a lawful command ( the obstacle course was closed), someone got hurt as a consequence, and the staff have closed ranks to protect the guilty.

She can: 1. request to see the CO to present a verbal (allowed) Redress of Grievance. The staff will ask her why she wants to see the CO, she will have to tell them, they will attempt to persuaded her not to. She will either get to see the CO, or the CF 98 will be completed correctly. She will now be marked as a trouble maker. If by chance she is told that the CO will  not see her (which may or may not be true), she can ambush him on his weekly (??) rounds. Violating the chain of command means doubly marked.

             2. get a hold  (base telephone operator or phone book) of the Base General Safety Officer or the Unit General Safety Officer and ask about the DND 663. The BGSO/UGSO may or may not be a civilian. Larger bases all have civilians. This will advise the chain of command that a probably preventable accident has occurred that must be investigated. The BGSO/UGSO will investigate the accident which includes referral to the CF 98. Again she will be marked.

Although it does not seem to be the case here, my experience with accident investigation is that the lowest common denominator always gets the blame. The Pte/Cpl was performing a task as ordered by a leader who gave the soldier the mission without the tools required to successful complete the mission. e.g. a MSE Op is given a task to move several vehicles and trailers from point A to point B where the vehicles must be backed up . The soldier requests assistance, a ground guide to safely back up the vehicles. Assistance is denied, even though the task requires a ground guide. The soldier gets to point B, does the walk around in each instance. Unfortunately, he knocks down part of a cinder block wall while backing up. (the cinder block wall was recently constructed by CE, so easily knocked down). As a consequence of the accident, the MSE Op is reported to be the cause of the accident, has his 404's lifted (thus grounded from doing his job) AND charged, convicted. Luckily on review, the charge was thrown out and a letter sent to the unit. The accident occurred because of lazy leadership. Everyone (all higher ranks) in this case knew what the MSE Op was required to do, no one assisted and no one made sure in his orders that he had the tools to accomplish the mission.


----------



## old medic (7 Feb 2009)

Someone could just find the USO/BSO or the MO and email them her contact information and/or this thread.
It's very difficult to get much else accomplished for her on a discussion board.


----------



## Cleared Hot (7 Feb 2009)

While everyone's points about getting copies of the paperwork esp CF98 and witness statements etc. are bang on, I don't have a clear enough understanding of the context to be too quick to blame the staff.  Why was the obstacle course marked closed are we sure it was due to conditions?  All bases require personnel who are running OC training to pass a certification process for the specific course they will be using, then it has to be booked for use (usually through Base Ops).  Many O.C.s are marked closed or "do not use"  etc. in an effort to dissuade anyone not qual or not having booked it in advance from using it.

By the way, if the "makes his rounds" feel free to complain.  He is coming around because he is trying to exercise his leadership and check on his subordinates i.e. staff if there is a serious issue and if this is systemic this is exactly the type of thing he would be looking for.  If he approached the students and they keep their mouths shut they only have themselves to blame.


----------



## Kat Stevens (7 Feb 2009)

The reason for closing the facility is not relevant.  B Ops, or Range Control closed it, full stop, do not use.  If the rappell tower is clearly marked "do not use", do you then take it upon yourself to throw people off the top because you're RM qualified?  Someone violated a posted order not to use a training area, and a kid's career, and possibly the rest of his/her life is effected because of it.  Nice to see the CYA culture is still alive and well since I retired.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Feb 2009)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Nice to see the CYA culture is still alive and well since I retired.



Of course, we know with absolute certainty that we have been given all the correct facts by the original poster.

Right ?


----------



## Kat Stevens (7 Feb 2009)

Point to you


----------



## CallOfDuty (25 Jan 2010)

Just wanted to bump this old thread...........does the OP have an update on how things went with the injury?  As well, how it got resolved?  
   I would have thought someone suggest that she see a case worker nurse at the MIR.  Its her/his job to make sure our needs are being met, and nothing is being overlooked.
Cheers


----------



## Brasidas (25 Jan 2010)

CallOfDuty said:
			
		

> Just wanted to bump this old thread...........does the OP have an update on how things went with the injury?



She got fixed. She spent a long while off her feet, things healed as perfectly as they could, and she eventually went back to finish BMQ. She did SQ, and is currently on her 3's in Kingston as a Sig Op.




> As well, how it got resolved?



She kept asking, and she got copies of all the paperwork that she asked for. She stayed more soft-spoken than I'd've liked, and the staff telling her coursemates that there was no need for witness statements really rankled me, but she got her own unabridged statement in.


   





> I would have thought someone suggest that she see a case worker nurse at the MIR.  Its her/his job to make sure our needs are being met, and nothing is being overlooked.
> Cheers



Thanks. I've never heard of such a creature in my own MIR adventures, and I'll keep it in mind in the future.


----------



## CallOfDuty (26 Jan 2010)

Cool.  Thanks for the reply.    I was curious as I'm dealing with my own spinal issue now.  For the most part it's being handled alot better than her story, with a few exceptions here or there.
  If anyone has anything to add in regards to spinal injuries and how it affected your work/trade/medical remusters, I'd love to hear about it.

  One thing I'm not clear about is where is the line drawn between someone who can't do thier trade( medical remuster), or say can't perform a rucksack march and stays IN.....as compared to someone who gets the boot?   

  I may be jumping the gun here, but it's good to be in the know.

Thanks guys
COD


----------

