Advertising Disclosure Email Disclosure

A claimant who refuses to undergo a drug detox program to be weaned off medications taken for a work injury is subject to suspension of benefits.

April 1, 2010
Bereznicki v. WCAB (Eat 'N Park Hospitality Group), 1009 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1720 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009)

The Court upheld a suspension of benefits where the claimant refused to undergo a detoxification program that would wean her off toxic doses of medication taken for the work injury. The employer petitioned to terminate compensation benefits the claimant had been on for ten years following a work-related back injury. At the same time, the claimant filed a utilization review petition challenging a UR determination that the medications the claimant received were not reasonable and necessary. The medications included Methadone, Oxycodone, Neurontin, Alprazolam, Zanaflex, Effexor, Wellbutrin, Depakote and Etodolac. Although the workers' compensation judge denied the termination petition, he found credible the testimony of the IME physician that the claimant needed a detox program to help wean her off most of the medications prescribed to her. The doctor testified that such treatment would involve little risk, decrease toxic doses of opiates, and make it possible for her to "live, work and play," although not return to her pre-injury job. Following the workers' compensation judge's decision, the employer offered the claimant an opportunity to enter a detox program under the direction of any physician other than the doctor prescribing the challenged medication. The employer filed a suspension petition under ยง 306(f.1) (8) after the claimant refused the treatment, arguing that it was reasonable and necessary medical treatment. The court agreed with the workers' compensation judge and found that the medical evidence supported the conclusion that the detox program was reasonable treatment since it was highly probable it would wean the claimant from the toxic doses of medication, allowing her to return to normal functioning and enhancing her prospects of returning to normal functioning. The court's opinion does not include any discussion of testimony as to the nature of the program that would allow the claimant to be weaned off the high level of medications without adverse consequences to her.

Case Law Alert, 2nd Qtr 2010

Affiliated Attorney

Francis X. Wickersham
Shareholder
(610) 354-8263
fxwickersham@mdwcg.com
G. Jay Habas
Managing Attorney, Erie, PA Office
(814) 480-7802
gjhabas@mdwcg.com

Practice Areas

Before you send this email please note:

You are attempting to send email, through a link on our website, to an attorney of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin or an employee in our firm. Please note that your email may not be treated as confidential and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should not rely upon the transmission of an email through this website if you are seeking to enter into such a relationship. Until such time as we have agreed to represent you, no information in your email will be treated as confidential. Please contact us directly by telephone at 1.800.220.3308 if it is your intent to seek legal counsel with our firm or convey confidential information.

If it is still your intent to send this email, knowing that it may not be treated as confidential, you may accept our terms of agreement by pressing "OK". If you choose not to accept these terms of agreement you may navigate away from this page by pressing "Cancel."