Discussion: View Thread

It's Time for Women to Quit Housework (Again) - Bloomberg

Very interesting read. This is why our calculations as to loss/replacement costs for household services are so much higher for women than men! Even single. 

Thank you, Scott!  I find this to be an excellent article, complete with "reasoning" under the surface.   A "must" read for personal and professional use, imo.  <o:p></o:p>

Beyond being sociological phenom and cultural indoctrination, the whole topic of "Household Services" has become an intrinsic part of my forensic practice over the past several decades.  To be clear, that part of my practice is not one that I consider to be "as an economist" in any sense of "staying in my lane."  True.  Economists have for a long time "taken the lead" on this litigated topic, but only because most private practice VRC's have not given it thought, and learned how to use ATUS, etc. in compiling the value of the topic.  The lack of VRC participation in this litigated topic is certainly not due to any lack of professional qualification.<o:p></o:p>

Household Services at times may be part of a Life Care Plan, but typically the topic has not been covered there to nearly the full extent of its value.   For me, the distinction between a LCP and LHHS typically, but not always, comes down to "what the Evaluee formerly did/needed for oneself pre-incident, compared to what, post-Incident, newly does/needs for oneself (LCP).   This is different from "what the Evaluee formerly did for others and no longer may do for them (LHHS).  Others may have alternate distinctions.  <o:p></o:p>

Household Services is based on "function," and movement, identical to the sense that we as VRC's use in quantifying the value of earning capacity.   Household services has traditionally been part of Rehab Plans, and the public sector has always acknowledged this in some way in providing benefits to the person with a disability.   Similar to LOEC evals, medical opinions and "caps" are the foundation to establish the extent of (loss of) function in and around the home.   The "financial value" of these services is truly part of the damages to be recognized in many venues.   Meanwhile, VRC's are certainly well-trained in foundation to be qualified in giving related Opinions thereof.<o:p></o:p>

So, the "Venus and Mars" among us continues to be part of our lives...  I think that the playing field may become a little less clouded and more respectful as starters if and when we attach financial value to what we tend to take for granted in everyday function and movement.   Adding this topic to our own service menu (for Plaintiff and Defense purposes) is something that I also highly recommend.  <o:p></o:p>

It's Time for Women to Quit Housework (Again) - Bloomberg

Very interesting read. This is why our calculations as to loss/replacement costs for household services are so much higher for women than men! Even single. 

Thank you, Scott!  I find this to be an excellent article, complete with "reasoning" under the surface.   A "must" read for personal and professional use, imo.  <o:p></o:p>

Beyond being sociological phenom and cultural indoctrination, the whole topic of "Household Services" has become an intrinsic part of my forensic practice over the past several decades.  To be clear, that part of my practice is not one that I consider to be "as an economist" in any sense of "staying in my lane."  True.  Economists have for a long time "taken the lead" on this litigated topic, but only because most private practice VRC's have not given it thought, and learned how to use ATUS, etc. in compiling the value of the topic.  The lack of VRC participation in this litigated topic is certainly not due to any lack of professional qualification.<o:p></o:p>

Household Services at times may be part of a Life Care Plan, but typically the topic has not been covered there to nearly the full extent of its value.   For me, the distinction between a LCP and LHHS typically, but not always, comes down to "what the Evaluee formerly did/needed for oneself pre-incident, compared to what, post-Incident, newly does/needs for oneself (LCP).   This is different from "what the Evaluee formerly did for others and no longer may do for them (LHHS).  Others may have alternate distinctions.  <o:p></o:p>

Household Services is based on "function," and movement, identical to the sense that we as VRC's use in quantifying the value of earning capacity.   Household services has traditionally been part of Rehab Plans, and the public sector has always acknowledged this in some way in providing benefits to the person with a disability.   Similar to LOEC evals, medical opinions and "caps" are the foundation to establish the extent of (loss of) function in and around the home.   The "financial value" of these services is truly part of the damages to be recognized in many venues.   Meanwhile, VRC's are certainly well-trained in foundation to be qualified in giving related Opinions thereof.<o:p></o:p>

So, the "Venus and Mars" among us continues to be part of our lives...  I think that the playing field may become a little less clouded and more respectful as starters if and when we attach financial value to what we tend to take for granted in everyday function and movement.   Adding this topic to our own service menu (for Plaintiff and Defense purposes) is something that I also highly recommend.  <o:p></o:p>

It's Time for Women to Quit Housework (Again) - Bloomberg

Very interesting read. This is why our calculations as to loss/replacement costs for household services are so much higher for women than men! Even single. 

Thank you, Scott!  I find this to be an excellent article, complete with "reasoning" under the surface.   A "must" read for personal and professional use, imo.  

Beyond being sociological phenom and cultural indoctrination, the whole topic of "Household Services" has become an intrinsic part of my forensic practice over the past several decades.  To be clear, that part of my practice is not one that I consider to be "as an economist" in any sense of "staying in my lane."  True.  Economists have for a long time "taken the lead" on this litigated topic, but only because most private practice VRC's have not given it thought, and learned how to use ATUS, etc. in compiling the value of the topic.  The lack of VRC participation in this litigated topic is certainly not due to any lack of professional qualification.

Household Services at times may be part of a Life Care Plan, but typically the topic has not been covered there to nearly the full extent of its value.   For me, the distinction between a LCP and LHHS typically, but not always, comes down to "what the Evaluee formerly did/needed for oneself pre-incident, compared to what, post-Incident, newly does/needs for oneself (LCP).   This is different from "what the Evaluee formerly did for others and no longer may do for them (LHHS).  Others may have alternate distinctions.  

Household Services is based on "function," and movement, identical to the sense that we as VRC's use in quantifying the value of earning capacity.   Household services has traditionally been part of Rehab Plans, and the public sector has always acknowledged this in some way in providing benefits to the person with a disability.   Similar to LOEC evals, medical opinions and "caps" are the foundation to establish the extent of (loss of) function in and around the home.   The "financial value" of these services is truly part of the damages to be recognized in many venues.   Meanwhile, VRC's are certainly well-trained in foundation to be qualified in giving related Opinions thereof.

So, the "Venus and Mars" among us continues to be part of our lives...  I think that the playing field may become a little less clouded and more respectful as starters if and when we attach financial value to what we tend to take for granted in everyday function and movement.   Adding this topic to our own service menu (for Plaintiff and Defense purposes) is something that I also highly recommend. 

It's Time for Women to Quit Housework (Again) - Bloomberg

Very interesting read. This is why our calculations as to loss/replacement costs for household services are so much higher for women than men! Even single. 

Agree, Bob. Work is work. Household work/care/purchasing is work equivalent in demands to work performed in the labor market. VEs are the experts who assess access to work/occupations, and therefore household work/care/purchasing. Typical hours expended by gender and age is exquisitely measured in ATUS. I don't do LCP (like many/most VEs), but this is also not only an LCP function, as it is vocational.

 Sometimes analysis and calculation of loss/replacement costs, using the FCE and/or MD limitations along with ATUS and LE tables produces loss/costs in far in excess of calculated LOEC.

 VEs who abdicate this access and cost analysis over to an economist (or to RN, OT, PT, MD, DC lacking in standard VE credentials and experience) are, IMO, logically, not doing their job and suggesting that someone without their needed expertise can handle what is vocational. Worse yet, some then stand by and watch from a distance as minimum wage, or OEWS wage (rather than what a consumer would actually pay for a vendor licensed/bonded/insured) is used for a thin array of needs, guaranteeing a wildly undervalued cost. But that is perhaps another discussion.

Thank you, Scott!  I find this to be an excellent article, complete with "reasoning" under the surface.   A "must" read for personal and professional use, imo.  

Beyond being sociological phenom and cultural indoctrination, the whole topic of "Household Services" has become an intrinsic part of my forensic practice over the past several decades.  To be clear, that part of my practice is not one that I consider to be "as an economist" in any sense of "staying in my lane."  True.  Economists have for a long time "taken the lead" on this litigated topic, but only because most private practice VRC's have not given it thought, and learned how to use ATUS, etc. in compiling the value of the topic.  The lack of VRC participation in this litigated topic is certainly not due to any lack of professional qualification.

Household Services at times may be part of a Life Care Plan, but typically the topic has not been covered there to nearly the full extent of its value.   For me, the distinction between a LCP and LHHS typically, but not always, comes down to "what the Evaluee formerly did/needed for oneself pre-incident, compared to what, post-Incident, newly does/needs for oneself (LCP).   This is different from "what the Evaluee formerly did for others and no longer may do for them (LHHS).  Others may have alternate distinctions.  

Household Services is based on "function," and movement, identical to the sense that we as VRC's use in quantifying the value of earning capacity.   Household services has traditionally been part of Rehab Plans, and the public sector has always acknowledged this in some way in providing benefits to the person with a disability.   Similar to LOEC evals, medical opinions and "caps" are the foundation to establish the extent of (loss of) function in and around the home.   The "financial value" of these services is truly part of the damages to be recognized in many venues.   Meanwhile, VRC's are certainly well-trained in foundation to be qualified in giving related Opinions thereof.

So, the "Venus and Mars" among us continues to be part of our lives...  I think that the playing field may become a little less clouded and more respectful as starters if and when we attach financial value to what we tend to take for granted in everyday function and movement.   Adding this topic to our own service menu (for Plaintiff and Defense purposes) is something that I also highly recommend. 

It's Time for Women to Quit Housework (Again) - Bloomberg

Very interesting read. This is why our calculations as to loss/replacement costs for household services are so much higher for women than men! Even single. 

Agree, Bob. Work is work. Household work/care/purchasing is work equivalent in demands to work performed in the labor market. VEs are the experts who assess access to work/occupations, and therefore household work/care/purchasing. Typical hours expended by gender and age is exquisitely measured in ATUS. I don't do LCP (like many/most VEs), but this is also not only an LCP function, as it is vocational.

 Sometimes analysis and calculation of loss/replacement costs, using the FCE and/or MD limitations along with ATUS and LE tables produces loss/costs in far in excess of calculated LOEC.

 VEs who abdicate this access and cost analysis over to an economist (or to RN, OT, PT, MD, DC lacking in standard VE credentials and experience) are, IMO, logically, not doing their job and suggesting that someone without their needed expertise can handle what is vocational. Worse yet, some then stand by and watch from a distance as minimum wage, or OEWS wage (rather than what a consumer would actually pay for a vendor licensed/bonded/insured) is used for a thin array of needs, guaranteeing a wildly undervalued cost. But that is perhaps another discussion.

Thank you, Scott!  I find this to be an excellent article, complete with "reasoning" under the surface.   A "must" read for personal and professional use, imo.  

Beyond being sociological phenom and cultural indoctrination, the whole topic of "Household Services" has become an intrinsic part of my forensic practice over the past several decades.  To be clear, that part of my practice is not one that I consider to be "as an economist" in any sense of "staying in my lane."  True.  Economists have for a long time "taken the lead" on this litigated topic, but only because most private practice VRC's have not given it thought, and learned how to use ATUS, etc. in compiling the value of the topic.  The lack of VRC participation in this litigated topic is certainly not due to any lack of professional qualification.

Household Services at times may be part of a Life Care Plan, but typically the topic has not been covered there to nearly the full extent of its value.   For me, the distinction between a LCP and LHHS typically, but not always, comes down to "what the Evaluee formerly did/needed for oneself pre-incident, compared to what, post-Incident, newly does/needs for oneself (LCP).   This is different from "what the Evaluee formerly did for others and no longer may do for them (LHHS).  Others may have alternate distinctions.  

Household Services is based on "function," and movement, identical to the sense that we as VRC's use in quantifying the value of earning capacity.   Household services has traditionally been part of Rehab Plans, and the public sector has always acknowledged this in some way in providing benefits to the person with a disability.   Similar to LOEC evals, medical opinions and "caps" are the foundation to establish the extent of (loss of) function in and around the home.   The "financial value" of these services is truly part of the damages to be recognized in many venues.   Meanwhile, VRC's are certainly well-trained in foundation to be qualified in giving related Opinions thereof.

So, the "Venus and Mars" among us continues to be part of our lives...  I think that the playing field may become a little less clouded and more respectful as starters if and when we attach financial value to what we tend to take for granted in everyday function and movement.   Adding this topic to our own service menu (for Plaintiff and Defense purposes) is something that I also highly recommend. 

It's Time for Women to Quit Housework (Again) - Bloomberg

Very interesting read. This is why our calculations as to loss/replacement costs for household services are so much higher for women than men! Even single.