Disability related to work related disability

[justaskingVAC]

Hello,

Does anyone have experience putting in a claim for a disability directly caused due to a work-related disability? For example, an injury developed that would not have normally occurred without a significant influence. Daily adjustments and tasks led to overuse and modified activity leading to another injury outside of work (degenerative, not acute).

Thank you,  :camo:

 

[catalyst]

It is possible you can apply for an award consequential to an awarded condition.

 

[justaskingVAC]

What would the official wording be or which section would I find this on VA's webpage?

 

[blackberet17]

When you submit your Application for Disability Benefits, in the section "Applicant Statement", where it asks what is your claimed condition, insert the condition you are claiming (ex. "patellofemoral syndrome right knee").

In the "If other, specify" box, state the condition it is consequential upon (ex. "consequential to torn right medical collateral ligament").

In the large box where it tells you to "Clearly state how you relate each claimed condition to your service or to a specific service period (or how it is related to a previously entitled condition)"...well, self-explanatory, really.

There is no "official wording" per se. If you're looking for the "official wording" from the legislation, section 46 of the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act (a.k.a. 'NVC') covers consequential claims, as follows:

46 (1) For the purposes of subsection 45(1), an injury or a disease is deemed to be a service-related injury or disease if the injury or disease is, in whole or in part, a consequence of

(a) a service-related injury or disease;

(b) a non-service-related injury or disease that was aggravated by service;

(c) an injury or a disease that is itself a consequence of an injury or a disease described in paragraph (a) or (b); or

(d) an injury or a disease that is a consequence of an injury or a disease described in paragraph (c).

The Pension Act's wording for consequential claims is very similar, and can be found under section 21(5).

I should note, you need to be in receipt of disability benefits (pension or award) for Condition A  (ex. "consequential to torn right medical collateral ligament") IOT be considered for disability benefits for Condition B (ex. "patellofemoral syndrome right knee").

 

[BinRat55]

So that leads me to a question - would (in your opinion) these circumstances be substantive:

Heart attack on the 300M range. A PWT 3 in 2 feet of snow with no path (you can do the math on that one!) resulted in being med-evac'd off the range. Consequently, it was determined that a heart attack was had. A 3B release resulted in the breach of UoS due to the heart specialist's MEL recommendations.

Now, I absolutely wholeheartedly (no pun intended) realized that many factors played a part in my heart's failing. However, couldn't it be argued that up to that point I was on a somewhat even-keel with no MELs at all so the PWT "exacerbated" it?

The main reason I am asking is because VAC actually denied my application for Coronary Incident - even though it's the SOLE reason for my release.

 

[blackberet17]

Oy vey.

I can imagine the reasons your claim was denied, i.e. the risk factors: previous family medical history (or strong medical link between family medical history and cardiac incident), smoking, high blood pressure, age, being male, high blood pressure, diabetes, stress, etc.

I won't touch on the weight or physical inactivity points, and otherwise presume you were in otherwise good health, prior to your cardiac event.

Those are all huge factors. One, two, or more of them taken together would put any normal human being at an elevated risk of a cardiac event.

What you would need, if not already done, is a medical opinion from your GP or - even better - a cardiac specialist who could speak to the probable (key word) contribution of the stress caused by the PWT in two feet of snow in accelerating (not the right word, but the only one which comes to mind right now) or precipitating the cardiac incident.

Once you have the medical opinion, take it to your BPA rep and request a Departmental Review. Also have a look at some of the studies out there on increased physical stress on cardiac events.

 

[BinRat55]

Makes sense. Thanks for your input. Just kinda sucks a little because this was the difference between a statutory pro hire and a regulatory pri hire!