Workers’ comp pays for weight-loss surgery
August 6, 2008 by Fred HosierPosted in: Here comes the judge, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
You’ve probably seen — or at least heard about — some pretty outrageous employee requests for workers’ comp to cover certain medical expenses that may have a loose connection at best to a workplace injury. Wait until you hear about this.
A judge has ordered workers’ comp to pay for an obese worker’s gastric bypass surgery, saying it’s compensable under Oregon law.
Edward Sprague injured his knee in 1976. He reinjured it in 1999.
Also during that time span, Sprague’s weight went from 225 to 350 pounds.
Doctors told Sprague his weight would prevent successful treatment of the knee condition, so he sought workers’ comp medical benefits for the weight-loss surgery.
The insurance carrier argued that the claim wasn’t compensable because the obesity wasn’t caused by his 1976 accident.
But the state comp board and court ruled that Sprague’s bypass surgery should be paid for by workers’ comp. The court said the injury was more than a minor cause of Sprague’s need for gastric surgery.
Tags: injury, surgery, workers' comp
August 8th, 2008 at 9:16 am
I hope this doesn’t open the box for knee injuries, just so they can have weight loss surgery (that many medical plans won’t pay for).
August 8th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
another example of how these liberal judges cause grief to private industry. ABSOULTELY ABSURD when one cannot get up and get around or excercise because of surgery the normal and i repeat the normal thing to do is push the food away and discipline yourself to intake etc. i thought California had all the weird cases. Companies were leaving California and relocating to the Oregons and Arizona because of these kind of rulings. Now where does one go to get a sensible ruling from a judge.
August 8th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I wonder if I can file a claim to get liposuction since my bottom is getting bigger from sitting at my desk?
February 12th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
We had an employee who injured his knee during therapy for a suspicious back injury. She received a settlement for both the knee injury and back injury since they were ruled permanent disabilities. Why us instead of the physical therapists that caused the injury? That’s like suing the driver who has new faulty brakes on their vehicle instead of the mechanic who screwed up. To make it worse, other employees are under the impression that the employee was paid out big bucks as a settlement, which was not true.
March 21st, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Marketta – absolutely brilliant! LOL!