|
Adding Insult to Injury
By Joseph F. Downey, Jr., Torrington
I have been involved with a distressing issue that is not aired on the news but which affects many citizens across Connecticut in various ways. The issue pertains directly to the State of Connecticut Workers’ Compensation Commission—a system that is supposed to provide injured or ill laborers with compensation for medical expenses or lost wages arising from a work-related injury or illness.
Although I've been involved in an almost 5 1/2-year battle over an ongoing case, I am not writing this to voice personal opinions about the compensation I have received; nor do I wish to focus on my specific injury or ailment. Instead, I want to raise public awareness about the Workers' Compensation Commission, an agency that is supposed to protect citizens by insuring that our rights as an injured or ill laborer are not compromised. To that end, rules governing both the worker and the insurers are written in the Connecticut Bulletin and printed for public reference. As they are written, these rules are meant to affect to both sides equally; in reality, though, they are applied very unequally.
The state employs a number of irregular and questionable practices that must be publicized. First, there is a pervasive attitude of distrust toward injured and ill workers who seek services. All workers who become disabled due to an injury or illness are not necessarily abusing the system, though that seems to be the assumption and the stereotype. Too often, the unfortunate individual who suffers a work-related injury or illness and then turns to the workers' compensation system is treated as though he or she were a criminal. This is totally unwarranted, yet I am sure that there are many others who will agree with this complaint.
Of all the directives issued regarding my case by the Workers' Compensation Commission, there is a particular incident I would like to identify publicly. Several years ago, during a period when I had persistent medical needs, a commissioner rejected plans for me to receive treatment at a particular medical facility. At a hearing, it was stated that Yale New Haven Hospital was not on the list of approved medical providers. This statement was untrue—and it altered the course of my medical care. I asked to see written proof but was unable to obtain any. To compound this problem, it can be impossible to find an attorney willing to challenge the Commission over abusive practices such as this.
To summarize, the Workers' Compensation Commission is unfairly biased against workers who seek compensation for work-related illness or injury. The list of regulations that workers must abide by is long and strictly enforced! What about the liable parties—do the regulations governing their responsibilities simply decompose as time passes? Where does a person turn for justice when the system is being overseen by an insurance industry-monopolized agency?
| 
