[doppelganger]

I notice on page 8 that te orporation has left out section 91.

1 (B ) discuss with claimant all the types of work that are available in New Zealand and suitable for the claimant;

(2) The Corporation must provide to the occupational assessor all information the Corporation has that is relevant to an intial occupational assessment.

Now I was at one the other day that was a result of a court decision. I along with the claimant considered that the previous assessment, medical reports and the court decision were all relevant as this would stop the round about that the ACC has with these assessors.

I take note that that diagram of page 4 is assessment after assessment. No Vocational rehabilitation is considered in that diagram.

as far as I am awere it is illegal to curate work or an income with public money that does not provide the intended service or described out come.

this documination was purposely constructed to advise CPANZ members how to go about in extracting money under the pretence of supplying a report for the purpose of administrating the Act. the diagram of page 4 and the leaving out important sections of the Act (so that the assessor doesn't know all that is needed) is proof that Vicki Berkahn ACC Healthwise had only one intention into deceive the claimants and levie payers.

[Karney]

What do they mean by "Yellow Flags"?

[hillsy]

Good evening all,

Thank you for the very timely post Iw2. I've got a meeting with my brand new Case Manager, Nick Henderson of Whangarei, on Tuesday that relates to this issue.

Am I correct to assume that the "YELLOW FLAGS?" YES/NO box are the same yellow flags used in the back pain pamphlets published by ACC?

Whether they are or not, I have just recieved a documented deviation from the procedure outlined in the flow chart. I don't see how ACC wrongly kicking me off and then taking me back on changes my occupational history.
The only possible reason for repeating the assessments would be if there was clinical evidence of a change to my condition that would render past assessments redundant. There has been no such evidence reported -the reinstatement letter makes no such assertation.
Here's the document set that predicts I'll have an interesting meeting on Tuesday (your comments, Dear All, would be much appreciated):

Quote

[Document 18]
Document Author Occupational Assessor Mr Burney
Document Date 11.02.2005
Document Description Initial Occupational Assessment Report:

Current occupation has "little opportunity to modify work demands to suit physical needs"
Trialled occupation "allow a good level of movement flexibility to meet physical needs."

Quote

[Document 26]
Document Author Occupational Initial Medical Assessor Dr Ruttinberg
Document Date 07.03.2005
Document Description Occupational Medical Assessor Report:

Claimant would not "manage in this work role currently and in a full time capacity"
incapacity due to symptoms "the exact cause of which is slightly unclear in terms of radiological and clinical examination findings. It is probable his symptoms will continue on"
Claimant "has degenerative disc disease affecting the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels as noted in the M.R.I scan"

Quote

[Document 31]
Document Author A.C.C Case Manager Ms Luff
Document Date 20.04.2005
Document Description A.C.C Decision To Suspend Entitlements:

Claimant's "current condition is no longer the result of your personal injury" accepted claim
reason for decision "confirmed by Mr Dempsey, Dr Ruttenberg and the A.C.C Branch Medical Advisor Dr Alastair Wilson in their reports"

Quote

[Document 63]
Document Author ACC Whangarei Team Leader Ms Hume
Document Date 25.08.2005
Document Description Entitlement Decision 20.08.2005

"ACC has considered the additional medical information from Mr Laws(sic) and Dr Thompson and conclude that the cause of your ongoing incapacity is due to your covered injury for the accident on 14 October 2004."
"The decision dated the 20 April 2005 has therefore been revoked and your weekly compensation payments will be reinstated from the 26 May 2005."

Quote

[Document 67]
Document Author ACC Case Manager Mr Henderson
Document Date 12.09.2005
Document Description Vocational Rehabilitation

"I have been allocated your claim in relation to your injury on the 14.10.2004 with regard to a Lumbar disc prolapse."
"Your claim has been allocated to me to assist you with vocational rehabilitation to return you to vocational independence."
"In regard to your vocational rehabilitation I would like to start the Initial Occupational & Medical Assessments."
"This is to ascertain your transferable skill base from your previous work history and relevant employment that such skill base can be transferred to."
"The medical examination is to ensure that the job tasks relevant to employment highlighted in the Initial Occupational assessment can be completed taking into consideration the injury you have sustained."

Peace
Hillsy

[hillsy]

Thanks Iw2, it should be fairly straight forward because I've got a one of these:

Quote

[Document 19]
Document Author A.C.C Case Manager Ms Luff
Document Date 14.02.2005
Document Description A.C.C 92 Individual Rehabilitation Plan

"Outcome to be achieved: Return to work or work readiness"
Claimant must "take personal responsibility for my rehabilitation"

and I'll be referring Mr Henderson to this:

Quote

"IPRC Act 2001 Section 110
(3)The Corporation must not require the claimant to participate in an assessment� 
  a. unless the claimant is likely to achieve vocational independence; and 
  b.until the claimant has completed any vocational rehabilitation that the Corporation was liable to provide under his or her individual rehabilitation plan."

Now that should have me going for "Chronic Pain Assessment" according to the flow chart. I know ACC reads my posts, should be interesting to see if they're prepared to mess with me out in the open. I'll keep you posted.

Peace
Hillsy

[doppelganger]

this is the flags


ACC/National Health Committee

Red Flags for potentially serious conditions:
Features of cauda equina syndrome (especially urinary retention, bilateral neurological
symptoms and signs, saddle anaesthesia) - this requires very urgent referral
Significant trauma
Weight loss
History of cancer
Fever
Intravenous drug use
Steroid use
Patient aged over 50 years
Severe, unremitting night-time pain
Pain that gets worse when patient is lying down

Yellow Flags: Psychosocial factors that increase the risk of developing or perpetuating
long-term disability and work loss associated with low back pain:
Attitudes and beliefs about back pain
Behaviours
Compensation issues
Diagnostic and treatment issues
Emotions
Family
Work

[doppelganger]

maungataniwha; the social part of the rehabilitation is overlooked at all and any Vocational rehabilitation assessment.

you need to request for a social rehabilitation and this comes under section 84.

like a lot of the ACc documination it is all there to show. there is o check list except for the KPI to see if he case manager is doing there work.

If no KPI are involved then no entitlements are given by the case manager.

the scheeme is meant to be run al at once and be tailered to each claimants needs.

Unforntally we eed to be put into groups offten the group will not obtain our needs.

Its time for change. heads out next month so we just need to get the rest of the blites to follow.

[watcha]

Maungataniwha, contact me off-line, I think you have been led astray by some and screwed by ACC.

ACC may call a WPP "vocational rehabilitation" but in fact, apart from some pretty useless short computer course, it does not contain any vocational rehab elements such as training. You sure are being screwed!!!

[Hatikva]

Quote

As a result I now have a HUGE student loan debt and sending me to WPP NINE YEARS ON is like closing the gate when the horse bolted as my disability deteriorated to the state where starting all over again is becoming less and less possible. I can't go to WPP now because I can't walk nor use my hands in the mornings. That was the reason for asking for urgent rehab ASAP from 1996 onwards, so I could get established into a job ASAP, while I was still able, then adapt as my disabilities progressed..... AND I kept telling ACC this for SEVEN LONG YEARS.

At least (and it is not most definately "least" - ) you make the effort to retrain yourself. Through no credit or help from ACC. I know what it is like to know that your situation is deteriorating - I fought with them for rehab/etc - far too late now. Had the bastards listened, the failed surgery would have been detected.

In my case now, the pressures of our debt were too much and I've deferred my course for now = too much stress to be able to do a level 7 course especially given the ongoing problems from a head injury as yet unresolved = it will now be another two years before I can graduate. But by then I probably will be in no position to apply the knowledge ..

Recently one job came up that I've been trained for, had several years experience in, had the qualifications for (formal training in Geology, Mineral Engineering and Geotechnical engineering (plus some University training in environmental engineering)) and had a good deal of hands on practical experience to offer. HOWEVER - I'd NEVER get through the medical, no matter how hard I tried. Never mind the fact that I'd not be able to work more than a few hours a day, for every other day at best. For me it would have been a dream job to work on through to the end my professional career - but thanks to ACC it was way out of reach. Well, ACC how does this fit in with your flippant statements about putting us back into work for which we were trained?

I at least can still walk - although I do scream in pain when either knee shifts out of position. But I can't write. So have special dispensation from OpenPoly to have my exams done on the computer. The stress of the recent injuries and the extreme financial stress we are going though (we live on hubby's student allowance - and he has to travel 200 km daily to class) was too much so deferred my course until I can see if I can sort something out with ACC - more so starting an advocacy group for EBOP... the bastards will have to put up with me helping others to get entitlements that ACC have fradulently withheld.

Love your comment ...

Quote

ACC reckons some claimants, such as those who have suffered a brain injury, may never be able to achieve the same level of employment. In such cases, aim as close as possible to the claimant�s previous employment level. (i.e) A claimant�s pre-injury work required them to have a specific tertiary qualification. They cannot return to that particular type of work, but ACC can provide rehabilitation assistance to support them in doing other similar work that also uses that qualification.

One thing about head injuries - can cause some wierd side effects. Really showed up in my pre and post head injury work/exam results. Decided drop in marks and level of work (as through I'd lost several years of education) and my concentration is severely impaired.

I admire you for undertaking the courses, and staying with it. Keep on with your studies as it is a way to grow inside - for your benefit and achievement - to h*ll with ACC.

[Moeroa]

 Fighter for Justice, on May 25 2010, 05:22 PM, said:

Keentohelp Post No 11: I cannot totally agree with your posting. In theory taking charge of your own rehabilitation plan, is a very good idea. The practice is slightly different. In my own case ACC have used any retraining I have done against me by suggesting in an IOA that I could be (I believe) a Law Clerk. I am not qualified or experienced enough to be a Law Clerk. That is, even if we ignore the many years I have been out of work.

I paid for my own University Study e.g. fees, books, travel, child care etc. ACC have never paid a cent. I do not believe I should have to keep spending money I do not have on my own rehabilitation, in the vain hope that I would be employable when qualified. I would also make some of my injuries worse and I would need a Mobility Disability Card.

I think the main reason people should not bankrupt themselves paying for and doing their own rehabilitation is that often they will still be unemployable at the end of it.

I do not have people whom I can seek advice from, nor favours that can be called in - in order to get my foot in the door of working. Nor do I have a rich husband who can bankroll me into suitable part time/full time employment!

It it my belief that many more people would be successfully rehabilitated into true part -time employment if ACC had to help find these jobs and people had to be truthfully able to do them. This used to be the case - it is not the case now.

Fighter for Justice

Posting here lest the member on the other thread deletes it.

 sunny, on May 26 2010, 05:13 PM, said:

WHAT!!
KTH YOU my friend have missed the point...TOTALLY!
Did you not read what I wrote?
I said I did go back to work an tryed my damndest to keep my job!
Idid try to help myself by funding rehab!
So where do you get the idea that I didnt?
Sensitive ... you bet ya boots I am, specially when a know all like you comes on an says the comments like "poor sensitive non-workers! How bloody dare you!
Who do you think you are?
I put up with crap like that from my so called work mates an inuendos thrown at me from supervisors an casemanagers
What right have you to make those sort of snide remarks
You always manage to upset someone every time you post on this forum
Have a little think how that sounds to people who are desperatly trying to get themselves well enough to actually be able to do a job!
You make it sound like no one on here wants to work!
Whats the matter are you jealous that we dont have jobs!
Well let me assure you I for one want a job, but I need to be able to actually do a bloody job before anyone will employ me you idiot!
Dont shoot the messenger! Hey Id like to do more than that to you right now!
How dare you talk like that to us!
Ive worked hard all my life, an believe me I aint no spring chicken
How many years have you worked!
So when you have worked as many years as I have then you can talk with some authority
The point is KTH
Im not talking about acc inaction either, Im talking about the idiot who makes a statement that people are better off in work, yes BUT only if they are fit enough to do the work!!
The POINT is KTH
I have tryed to help myself an am still doing so, but why? Ive payed to have that rehab already!

I'm hearing you Sunny, I hear you.

[doppelganger]

here is a good discussion on rehabilitation and the ACC staff not knowing how to apply Vocational Rehabilitation.

Quote

This study has shown that fitness based multidisciplinary
Rehabilitation can return people to the work force after injury,
despite prolonged periods off work. Two-thirds of clients had
been off work more than six months. and one half for more
than a year. The time since injury did not influence the number
of people who returned to full or part, time work.
Demographic factors such as age, sex, and marital status
were not related to programme outcome, neither were body
part injured. time since injury or the type of job held before
the injury. Accurate assessment of vocation liability helped
clients (and the rehabilitation co-ordinators) establish the type
of job which the client could handle, especially with an ongoing
disability. however mild, Following rehabilitation, the majority
of clients did not return to the same type of job held prior to
injury, and accepted less demanding jobs. Only five of 23
clients returned to medium or heavy manual jobs.
Analysis of psychological variables showed that clients had significant changes in physical and total SIP scores. The lack of a significant change in psychosocial SIP scores suggests
that the Social aspects of attending the centre (social
interaction. group effects were not the important factors. The
majority of clients were young men who tended to use physical
outlets for emotional expression (sport, hard work). The
improvement in the physical dimension of the SIP supports
that the emphasis on fitness suited this client group.
Correlation between programme outcome and the clients'
perception of benefit approached significance. suggesting a
relationship between these variables. Education about their
Disability and assistance to develop coping skills are important
interventions as well as programmes working on physical aspects of disability.
The interventions provided by the programme were
numerous. A full medical and physiotherapy assessment
determined base line problems and gave indications for referral
for active treatment by a surgeon or physiotherapist. An
individually planned health and fitness programme. modified
by the presence of pain or disability, allowed each client to
progress at their own rate with an increase in physical and
mental confidence. Education sessions were directed towards
care of the back. to help with recovery and prevent further
injury. General health and fitness education was also provided.
Relaxation sessions were found useful, especially in pain
management. Close liaison with the ACC rehabilitation
co-ordinators, who maintained a high level of input. allowed
vocational rehabilitation to proceed in a way which has been
shown to be effective 110J. The contribution of exercise in
rehabilitation has been demonstrated [l1.12]. and the
importance of individually designed and monitored
programmes must be stressed [13].
The relationship between pain and fitness is a complex one.
Reduced pain perception has been noted among very fit
athletes (14J, and may be related to endorphin release with
exercise, Behaviour modification took place with staff
encouraging positive attitudes and achievements. and taking
little notice of expressions of pain or negative attitudes.
Mixing in a group with other people with similar disabilities
produced a therapeutic effect among the clients. many of
( whom had been demoralised by failure to achieve a pain free
life. The programme staff emphasised that pain could persist,
but that clients would learn to live with it.
Satisfactory six month outcomes were found in 10 of the
20 clients who had been off work for more than six months,
none of whom was expected to return to any activity in the
near future. This demonstrated the effectiveness of this
programme in enabling them to take part in work trials leading
to productive activity.
Acknowledgements: This project was funded by the Accident
Compensation Corporation of New Zealand. and carried out in
association with the injury prevention research group of the University
of Otago. The authors would like to thank Professor Margaret Loutit
of the University of Otago and Mr Murray Johnson of the ACC for
their support.

the full article

25 ApriL 1990 NEW ZEALAnd MEDICAL JOURNAL page 179
IN PRACTICE
The rehabilitation of injured workers in New Zealand: a pilot
study
T H Caradoc-Davies MA. FRACP. FACRM. Senior lecturer, Depanment of Medicine: B D Wilson BSc. MS. PhD,
Senior lecturer; J GAnson DipPhEd. MS, PhD. lecturer. School of Physical Education. University of Otago, Dunedin

[tommy]

Round six for tommys rehabilitation thru the vocational independence medical test just completing the FRP ie the functional reactivation programme

[hukildaspida]

Refresh

[unit1of2]

I was sent to you know who...'Du Plessis' this year and his HUGE lengthy full of lies and false information cluding stating I had been (convenient for ACC) diagnosed with a medical complaint that funnily enough I have never ever, ever been diagnosed with, plus I'm not in the age group for this heart and lung failure condition. Hence he's trying to counter attack ''a Head Trauma issue' by stating this. I have rung a certain specialist who confirmed NO he has never ever made that diagnosis in my situation. ...any way after huge numbers of asssessments using flawed original reports and they continue to do so irrespective of legal agreement that they agreed (ACC) they wouldn't.,
I am now being made to attend an Occupational Medical Assessment... If my GP Cert states unfit... how come after 'NIL, ZERO' help, assistance for original issues and for issues they are fighting NOT to cover, even though they are a direct result of Accident... they are forcing me into an Occupational type thing... ???? Yes I get it... they are gunning to shunt me off without ANY REHABILITION AT ALL.... or ANY OTHER NEEDED ASSISTANCE.....

[Moeroa]

 unit1of2, on 05 December 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

I was sent to you know who...'Du Plessis' this year and his HUGE lengthy full of lies and false information cluding stating I had been (convenient for ACC) diagnosed with a medical complaint that funnily enough I have never ever, ever been diagnosed with, plus I'm not in the age group for this heart and lung failure condition. Hence he's trying to counter attack ''a Head Trauma issue' by stating this. I have rung a certain specialist who confirmed NO he has never ever made that diagnosis in my situation. ...any way after huge numbers of asssessments using flawed original reports and they continue to do so irrespective of legal agreement that they agreed (ACC) they wouldn't.,
I am now being made to attend an Occupational Medical Assessment... If my GP Cert states unfit... how come after 'NIL, ZERO' help, assistance for original issues and for issues they are fighting NOT to cover, even though they are a direct result of Accident... they are forcing me into an Occupational type thing... ???? Yes I get it... they are gunning to shunt me off without ANY REHABILITION AT ALL.... or ANY OTHER NEEDED ASSISTANCE.....

The notorious Dr Duplicitous again

Quote

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRYIN THE MATTER OF

BETWEEN AND

Hearing: 16 May 2012

CIV-2012-485-381 [2012] NZHC 1038

an intended appeal pursuant to s 162 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001

BRUCE FARQUHAR Appellant

ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent

Appearances: A C Beck for the appellant I G Hunt for the respondent

Judgment: 16 May 2012

JUDGMENT OF CLIFFORD J

[1] Mr Farquhar is granted special leave to appeal on the question of whether or not, in the circumstances of his case – having regard in particular to any relevant transitional provisions, the Corporation was entitled as a matter of law to require him to undergo an updated Initial Occupational Assessment in the manner that it did in its letter of 27 August 2009, given that Mr Farquhar had previously been the subject of an Initial Occupational Assessment in December 2004.

[2] As I indicated at this morning’s hearing, leave is reserved if any issues arise for the Corporation or Mr Farquhar from my formulation of the legal question for which special leave is granted. Any such application is to be made by 5.00pm Friday 25 May 2012.

“Clifford J”

FARQUHAR V ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION HC WN CIV-2012-485-381 [16 May 2012]

Solicitors: Gault Mitchell, Wellington for the appellant – [email protected] (Counsel: A Beck – [email protected]) Young Hunter, Christchurch for the respondent – [email protected]