This second article in a two-part series on Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder work comp claims examines how the courts should interpret PTSD claims in the context of the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation statute. The first article explained why the date of injury in work comp claims are crucial to the viability of many PTSD claims and illustrated the various types of injuries recognized by the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Act. Part II outlines the historical interpretation of psychological claims in work comp, how the statute defines compensable mental claims, and the mechanism of PTSD in further support of why PTSD is an occupational disease, not a specific mental injury.
Historical Analysis of the Date of Injury in Psychological Injuries

In the quintessential case, Lockwood v. Independent School District No. 877, the Minnesota Supreme Court divided psychological injuries into three categories: “mental-physical,” “physical-mental,” and “mental-mental.” See Johnson v. Paul’s Auto & Truck Sales, 40 W.C.D. 137, 409 N.W.2d 506 (Minn. 1987). “Mental-physical” and “physical-mental” cases were deemed compensable work related psychological injuries. Id. While mental-mental claims were not compensable. Id.

On October 1, 2013, the Minnesota Legislature changed the law. Post-traumatic stress disorder claims are now compensable. Minn. Stat. § 176.011, subdivision 15. Other “mental-mental” type claims are not compensable, only PTSD. While an employee may suffer from clinical depression as a result of the employee’s work activities, not tied to a physical injury, depression is not a recognized mental-mental claim under the statute and therefore is not compensable

The Pre-October 1, 2013 Framework for Determining the Date of Injury is Void for Mental-Mental Claims

Under the pre-October 1, 2013 framework for determining the compensability of a psychological claim involving PTSD, the mental aspect was anchored to the physical component. The physical component of the injury had a definitive or specific date of injury. Thus, courts did not need to determine the date of the psychological component of the injury.

Now, that the law has changed, the courts analysis of psychological claims involving PTSD must change as well.

Statutory Construction

The basics of statutory construction require that PTSD is treated as an occupational disease under the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Act, not a specific injury.

Rather than creating a new section or classification of injuries, the legislature amended Minnesota Statute 176.011, subdivision 15, to define occupational disease as “mental impairment as defined in paragraph (d) or a physical disease…”  Paragraph (d) defines mental impairment as a “diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder.”

Paragraph (a) of Minnesota Statute § 176.011, subdivision 15 reaffirms that employees with “physical-mental” and “mental-physical” injuries are eligible for work comp benefits. This physical-mental, mental-physical, and mental-mental distinction between psychological injuries was originally created through case law, not statute.

Had the legislature desired for the courts to use the specific injury framework and used the date of exposure of the date of injury, the legislature would have created another subsection of the Minnesota workers’ compensation statute entirely devoted to psychological injuries. But, the legislature explicitly defines PTSD as an occupational disease and therefore, as an occupational disease, the date of disablement is the date of injury in PTSD claims.

The Nature of a Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Injury

The current diagnostic formulation of PTSD is the DSM-5 or the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association. The DSM-5 divides the diagnostic criteria into seven categories:

Criterion A: experiencing or witnessing the trauma itself
Criterion B: the intrusive symptoms (1 of 5 symptoms, such as recurrent memories, distressing dreams, flashbacks, intense distress at triggers, physiological reactions)
Criterion C: avoidance symptoms
Criterion D: negative alterations of cognition and mood
Criterion E: arousal symptoms (2 of 6 symptoms, irritable behavior/angry outbursts, reckless behavior, hyper-vigilance, startle response, concentration problems, sleep disturbance)
Criterion F: onset and duration of disturbance (more than one month)
Criterion G: functional disturbance- impairment in social, occupational, or areas of functioning
Criterion H: symptoms have causal relationship to trauma, not alcohol or substance related

PTSD is treated through a combination of psychotherapy and medication which may include: prolonged exposure therapy, cognitive processing therapy, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy (EMDR), and cognitive behavioral therapy. PTSD may actually change the physical and chemical structure of the brain.

People with PTSD are at a high risk of co-morbid disorders such as alcohol or drug abuse and depression. So because an employee also may abuse drugs or alcohol or struggle with clinical depression or anxiety, the employee may still have PTSD.

Because of the nature of PTSD, classifying it as a specific injury with a specific “exposure” date is illogical. Physicians are not able to even diagnose PTSD until at least one month after the traumatic event. Not all people who are exposed to a traumatic event develop PTSD. Moreover, as set forth in Criterion A in the DSM-5, PTSD develops from the exposure to one or more traumatic events. Focusing on one traumatic event when in fact the police officer or employee may have experienced numerous life-threatening traumatic events does not make sense. It is questionable whether a physician could even pinpoint to a degree of medical certainly which event accounts for which percentage of the employee’s PTSD; therefore the date of disablement is the logical date of injury.

PTSD claims have at least two disparate events

First the traumatic exposure(s), then the debilitating symptoms that cause the employee’s impairment at a later point in time. As defined in Criterion G in the DSM-5, PTSD requires a later functional disturbance or a impairment in social, occupational, or other areas of functioning. This functional disturbance triggers the second event.

At Meuser Law Office, P.A. we have been representing employees, including many police officers, correctional officers, and firefighters, with PTSD for over ten years both under the old and the new law. If you have PTSD and believe you developed it as a result of exposure to traumatic events at work you should consult with an attorney experienced in this area of law.

If you are a police officer, correctional officer, or firefighter you may also be entitled to PERA or MSRS benefits and the continuation of health care as a result of developing PTSD. Additionally, if you are a licensed police officer with PTSD you may be entitled to benefits under Minnesota Statute §299A.475, which includes up to a year of unreimbursed wage loss benefits and a year’s worth of unreimbursed medical expenses for treatment of PTSD.

Contact us today for a free, no-obligation consultation. An attorney with Meuser Law Office, P.A. will review your claim and explain your rights under PERA or MSRS, Minnesota Statute §299A.475, and the Minnesota Workers’ Compensation Act. Don’t let your employer or the insurance adjuster deny your claim without consulting with an attorney knowledgeable in this nuanced area of the law.

Click here to read the first article in this two-part series.

Original Article: https://peraworkcompattorneymn.blogspot.com/search?q=Part+II%3A+Post-Traumatic+Stress+Disorder+in+Minnesota+Work+Comp+is+an+Occupational+Disease%2C+Not+a+Specific+Mental+Injury

Federation partners with KSTP Channel 5 and People Serving People this holiday season to deliver toys and host holiday festivities for Minneapolis kids and their families.

(MINNEAPOLIS, MN) – This holiday season, the Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis teamed up with KSTP Channel 5 for their “Stuff the Sleigh” toy drive holiday campaign, as well as People Serving People shelter to deliver presents to the children and their families staying at the shelter.

KSTP Channel 5’s “Stuff the Sleigh” collected approximately 1,500 toys during the campaign. During the campaign, the Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis worked in coordination with Bike Cops for Kids, PAL, and the Community Engagement Team to wrap and distribute the toys to over 300 kids in Minneapolis.

The campaign also included a holiday party for the kids and their families. Over 100 kids and their families were able to enjoy the holiday party and festivities that were hosted at Lucy Laney Elementary School. Attendees got to take family pictures, do crafts together, decorate Christmas cookies, and eat dinner. The evening was topped off with a visit by Santa where he delivered toys to the kids. As a result of the generosity of KSTP viewers, families had to opportunity to “shop” for additional gifts for their kids.

This season, the Federation had the opportunity to bring hundreds of toys to People Serving People shelter for the families staying at the shelter over the holiday season. At this event, the Federation provided several items to help fulfill some of the critical needs the shelter had, such as providing diapers, formula, blankets, sheets, and air mattresses to the shelter.

“Teaming up with KSTP, Bike Cops for Kids, PAL and the other units within the police department gave the Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis an opportunity to spread holiday cheer to many kids and families in Minneapolis,” stated Bob Kroll, President of the Police Federation of Minneapolis. “It is so important that we connect with and give back to the community members who we serve every day.”

Original Article: https://peraworkcompattorneymn.blogspot.com/2016/04/part-i-post-traumatic-stress-disorder.html

Under the Minnesota Workersí Compensation Act, in particular Minnesota Statute ß 176.011, subdivision 15, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (ìPTSDî) is defined as an occupational disease. Because PTSD is defined as an occupational disease, the date the employee became disabled is the date of injury, not a specific traumatic event(s). Employersí and insurersí reliance of the date of a traumatic incident, rather than the date of disablement, unfairly denies workersí compensation benefits to injured workers suffering from PTSD.
This is the first in a 2-part series analyzing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder injuries in the Minnesota workersí compensation system. Part I describes the types of injuries in the workersí compensation system and Part II demonstrates that PTSD should be categorized as an occupational disease type injury.

An Injured Workerís Date of Injury is a Controlling Event

The date of an employeeís injury is a controlling event in Minnesota workersí compensation law. This means that the law in effect on the date of the employeeís injury determines the amount and type of benefits to which the employee may be entitled. The date of injury is also important in avoiding statute of limitation or notice issues that may prevent employees from receiving benefits. Because PTSD was not a compensable injury under the Minnesota Workersí Compensation Act until after October 1, 2013, determining the date of injury is vital to a successful PTSD claim.

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder should not be treated the same as a ìspecific injuryî under the law. Currently, many of the employees suffering from PTSD have experienced or been exposed to specific traumatic events prior to October 1, 2013. But, because he or she did not become disabled until after October 1, 2013, the injured employee has a compensable work comp claim.

Unfortunately, due to perhaps a lack of knowledge of the mechanism of PTSD or desire to avoid paying injured workersí benefits, many employers and insurers treat PTSD as a specific injury. Hopefully, the Minnesota Courts will take up this issue and provide clarification to ensure many deserving injured workers receive compensation for their injuries. Many of the employees suffering from PTSD are police officers, firefighters, and correctional officers. These public servants who risk their lives deserve better from the Minnesota workersí compensation system.

Types of Injuries in Minnesota Workersí Compensation Law

For background, Minnesota workers’ compensation law recognizes various types of injuries, including but not limited to: specific, Gillete, or occupational diseases. Different types of injuries have different ways to determine the date of injury.

Specific Injuries

A specific injury occurs when a discernable incident causes an employee to be injured in the course and scope of the employment. Previous case law used an ìaccident testî to determine if an injury was compensable. The date of injury in a specific injury appears obvious – the date on which the employee suffered injuries from an incident or accident. For example, an employee injures her back during a slip and fall at work on April 4, 2015; therefore, the date of injury is April 1, 2015 and the applicable laws are those are in effect on April 4, 2015.

Gillete Type Injuries

In contrast, a Gillete type injury is when injuries occur as a result of repetitive trauma in the performance of ordinary job duties. The date of injury in a Gillete type claim allows for some flexibility. Previous case law required that courts use the date when an ìultimate breakdownî occurred. Now, the modification of an employeeís job duties due to restrictions, when an employee seeks medical treatment, or lost time from work may be used to determine the employeeís date of injury.

In Anfinson v. Anamax Corp. the Court determined that the last date of employment was the date of the employeeís Gillete type injury, even though the employee did not miss time from work, have medical treatment, nor changed jobs as a result of the medical condition. slip. op., No. WC09-4976 (W.C.C.A. Mar. 8, 2010). Recently the court found that when an employeeís condition did not cause symptoms until some time after his last date of employment, the date of disablement can be established as the last date of employment. See Wittstock v. McPhilips Bros. Roofing Co., slip op. No. WC12-5471 (W.C.C.A. Jan. 9, 2013).

Determining the date of injury in Gillete type injuries is much more complicated than specific injuries arising out of specific incidents or accidents. The employer and insurer may disagree with the employeeís attorney as to the date of injury. Each side will argue a date of injury that either limits the benefits or allows for more generous benefits. If the matter settles, the parties may compromise and if the matter were to proceed to a workersí compensation hearing, then a judge would determine the date of injury.

Occupational Diseases

An occupational disease is a disease arising out of and in the course of employment, peculiar to the occupation in which the employee is engaged, and the employment puts the employee at a greater risk than the general public. Minn. Stat. ß 176.011, subdivision 15(a). The date of injury in occupational disease cases, the date in which the injury becomes compensable, is the date the employee becomes disabled as a result of the condition. Minn. Stat. ß 176.66, subd. 1.

The definition of the date of disablement has expanded over the years. Previously, the date of disablement occurred when an employee is no longer able to earn full wages in the position last employed. See Notch v. Victory Granite Co., 28 W.C.D. 252, 238 N.W.2d 426 (Minn. 1976). The date of disablement does not have to be the last date the employee worked. See Sorcan v. USX Corp., slip op., No. WC04-287 (W.C.C.A. June 29, 2005). The date of disablement can also be defined as taking a different job at reduced wages or requesting a job change. Lundmark v. Nokomis Sheet Metal, 45 W.C.D. 213 (1991).

Notably, in occupational disease work comp claims, the employeeís entitlement to benefits is established by the law in effect on the date of disablement, not the law in effect on the last date of exposure. See Stillson v. Peterson & Hede Co., 454 N.W.2d 430 (Minn. 1990).

As determined by the mechanisms of PTSD and the Minnesota Legislature, PTSD has been defined for the purposes of workersí compensation as an occupational disease; therefore, the appropriate date of injury is the date on which the employee became disabled as a result of the condition, not the date of the traumatic event or ìexposure.î

If you or someone you know suffers from PTSD due to a work-related accident or traumatic incident, you should consult with an attorney experienced in this area of the law. At Meuser Law Office, P.A., we have represented many clients with PTSD, including police officers, firefighters, first responders and correctional officers. We understand this nuanced area of the law and work with our client to ensure you receive the full benefits you are entitled. Contact Meuser Law Office, P.A. for a no-obligation consultation today. Donít let the insurance company unfairly deny you benefits as a result of their misinterpretation of the law surrounding PTSD in Minnesota.

When you are applying for a Police Officer and Firefighter Plan PERA Duty Disability benefit, it is important to know that there are some very complicated rules that apply. If your attorney is not aware of some of these rules, it can cost you significant amounts of money. For example, there is what we call the 2-year Rule. What that means is if your injury pre-dated your application by more than 2 years, you have additional criteria that you need to demonstrate in order to be approved for a PERA Police and Fire Plan Duty Disability.

You need to show that the injury prevents you not only performing your normal duties as a police officer or firefighter, but you also need to demonstrate that you cannot perform the duties that you were expected to perform in the last 90 days you worked. Where this typically becomes an issue is if you are working for an employer that offers long-term light duty. And in fact there are a number of employers that purportedly offer permanent light duty. In fact, Minneapolis and St. Paul very frequently attempt to offer some form of light duty which can make your application much more complicated.

If you have a Minnesota Police and Fire Plan PERA Duty Disability claim, contact the attorneys at Meuser Law Office, P.A. for a free, no-obligation legal consultation. Our knowledgeable attorneys will help you understand the often confusing PERA Duty Disability benefit law and ensure you receive the full benefits you are entitled to.

October 19, 2016

Terrence M. Cunningham, President
The International Association of Chiefs of Police
44 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 200
Alexandria, Virginia 22314

Dear President Cunningham,
I am a former law enforcement officer who, as you stated in your recent IACP Speech are part of a “dark side of our shared history.” Apparently, I along with countless other officers from this “dark side,” “created a multigenerational-almost inherited-mistrust between many communities of color and their law enforcement agencies.” Further, you stated “many officers who do not share this common heritage often struggle to comprehend the reasons behind this historic mistrust” and “are often unable to bridge this gap and connect with some segments of their community.” To that end you felt the need to publically apologize for our “actions of the past and the role that our profession has played in society’s historical mistreatment of communities of color.”

As you stated in your apology speech, the history of American Law Enforcement is clearly “replete with examples of bravery, self sacrifice and service to the community.” I strongly agree.

I also realize there are periods and incidences of police misconduct that sadly resulted in mistrust, discrimination and even loss of life. However, I must ask, do the actions of those from the “dark side” outweigh the positive side of American Law Enforcement? Apparently you choose to believe that contemporary issues in modern day Law Enforcement are a reflection of those peace officers from another time. You also apparently choose to believe that “common solutions to better protect our communities” can only come from within Law Enforcement.

President Cunningham it is obvious from your speech that you feel the communities Law Enforcement serves bare no responsibilities past or present when it comes to their public safety. Therefore, as far as you are concerned, those communities have no “darker periods.” Based on your brief speech, you simply chose to paint the history of U.S. Law Enforcement not only with a broad brush, but with dark paint as well.

I won’t take up any more of your time President Cunningham. As the saying goes, I’m sure you will simply round file this letter. I know you will continue to voice one sided solutions to challenges in modern day policing. I also realize you will never ask the communities law enforcement serves to play a significant role in their public safety. Apparently, it would not be politically correct to call for shared responsibility in problem solving. After all, in your mind the blame for “darker periods” in this country’s history of policing lie solely at the feet of those who served in the past.

In conclusion, your speech will be remembered for one thing and one thing only, the apology. I am saddened about the disparaging remarks you directed at all of those peace officers who served in the past. I am one of those peace officers President Cunningham and I would like and apology.
Respectfully,

Ronald G. VanRaaphorst
Captain (Ret.) Former Spokesperson/PIO
FBI NA Class 221

Contact: 
Carl Kuhl

carl@connollykuhlgroup.com

October 21, 2016

Officers Mark Ringgenberg and Dustin Schwarze reinstated by Minneapolis Police Department

Minneapolis, MN – The following is a statement from Lt. Bob Kroll, President, Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis, in response to Minneapolis Police Chief Harteau’s press conference regarding the reinstatement of Mark Ringgenberg and Dustin Schwarze.



“The Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis applauds the findings of the MPD Internal Affairs investigation and is please that Officers Ringgenberg and  Schwarze can begin to put this unfortunate event behind them and focus on their careers.

As we have maintained from the start, our officers followed procedure and training protocols, acting within the law, while responding to a dangerous and unfortunate situation that has affected so many lives, including Officers Mark Ringgenberg and Dustin Schwarze.


Members of the public demanded an independent investigation conducted by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, demanded oversight be provided by the United States Department of Justice, and demanded that the Grand Jury process not be used.  After meeting all the demands of the public and the conclusion of Internal Affairs Division investigation, Officers Mark Ringgenberg and Dustin Schwarze have been exonerated for the third time.

As these officers return to work, we expect all members of the public to accept the process and outcome.”

Minneapolis, MN – Today, in yet another display of political pandering, Governor Dayton announced the creation of the “Governor’s Council on Law Enforcement and Community Relations.” The creation of a Council made up of the usual Noah’s Ark of government and association members defeats its own stated purpose. Among the Council’s 15 voting members, nowhere does it specifically include a police officer currently working an active patrol assignment. For a council tasked with improving relations among the community and law enforcement, the council should include at least three police officers actively working patrol assignments; one from a large city, a suburban setting, and a community in Greater Minnesota.

The Council is tasked with making policy recommendations to improve relations, adopt best practices and expand training programs but right now, over 800 Minneapolis police officers are working through their third round of US Department of Justice developed implicit bias training. Governor Dayton’s council just adds another layer of bureaucratic procedure that diverts focus, time, and resources to admiring problems instead of solving them. Minneapolis police officers and all of Minnesota’s peace officers are committed to protecting and serving their communities. Law enforcement and Minnesota’s many diverse and varied communities would be better served by a commitment from Governor Dayton and his Noah’s Ark council to consider the impact that the entire criminal justice system, along with poverty, education, jobs and economic development has on community relations.