Discussion: View Thread

All - I searched through old postings in the Forensic and Rehabilitation and Disability Case Management sections and could not find anything addressing this topic so I thought I would throw it out for thoughts and opinions.  Here in Illinois we are seeing huge growth in the area of companies that offer to place W/C claimants into volunteer positions, e.g. thrift stores, hospitals, etc. while they are recovering from their work injuries or after they have reached MMI, but are unable to RTW.  These programs are being presented as transitional in nature.  I have always had mixed feelings about this approach and not because I necessarily feel that this is always a bad idea, but rather because I have yet to hear an insurance adjuster describe such a program as anything other than punitive (I am going to make them earn their benefits).  Given that benefits are paid as a result of an accepted work related injury it would seem that earning them is not necessary in order to receive them.  I think that placing someone in a temporary, transitional position at a non-profit where some sort of skill is learned or acquired that is rehabilitative in purpose makes sense, but I struggle with the argument that there is some rehabilitative merit to having a 60 year old ironworker folding clothes at a thrift store because this is going to enhance his RTW potential somehow.  There seems to be an ethical issue in advocating for these programs/placements across the board with all claimants versus selectively with some that may actually gain some experience or skill from the placement.  Does anyone have any thoughts on this issue that they are willing to share?  Thanks.

All - I searched through old postings in the Forensic and Rehabilitation and Disability Case Management sections and could not find anything addressing this topic so I thought I would throw it out for thoughts and opinions.  Here in Illinois we are seeing huge growth in the area of companies that offer to place W/C claimants into volunteer positions, e.g. thrift stores, hospitals, etc. while they are recovering from their work injuries or after they have reached MMI, but are unable to RTW.  These programs are being presented as transitional in nature.  I have always had mixed feelings about this approach and not because I necessarily feel that this is always a bad idea, but rather because I have yet to hear an insurance adjuster describe such a program as anything other than punitive (I am going to make them earn their benefits).  Given that benefits are paid as a result of an accepted work related injury it would seem that earning them is not necessary in order to receive them.  I think that placing someone in a temporary, transitional position at a non-profit where some sort of skill is learned or acquired that is rehabilitative in purpose makes sense, but I struggle with the argument that there is some rehabilitative merit to having a 60 year old ironworker folding clothes at a thrift store because this is going to enhance his RTW potential somehow.  There seems to be an ethical issue in advocating for these programs/placements across the board with all claimants versus selectively with some that may actually gain some experience or skill from the placement.  Does anyone have any thoughts on this issue that they are willing to share?  Thanks.