Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) is a complex condition which is markedly similar to Darkroom Disease. They may in fact be the same condition, which is useful for us as MCS is slowly gaining acceptance in the scientific community. DD research (and compensation) has tended to focus on asthma only, whereas MCS is rarely accepted by WCB as a compensable condition despite the fact that a consensus definition has been in place for some years. A recent British Columbia WCAT decision is one of the best I've seen and while compensations boards are not bound by precedents, it doesn't hurt to have a growing number of MCS cases accepted in our profession: "The overall evidence indicates that MCS continues to be controversial, at least insofar as establishing universal diagnostic criteria on which such an illness ought to be based, and in terms of fully understanding the pathogenesis of the associated complaints. Nevertheless, I accept the evidence reasonably establishes that MCS is an illness that provokes symptoms that arise due to increased sensitivity to non-specific irritants. .... MCS is not an occupational disease that has been recognized by the Board by inclusion in Schedule B or by regulation of general application. Nevertheless, pursuant to item #26.04 of the Rehabilitation Services and Claims Manual, Volume I (RSCM I) a disease that has not been previously designated or recognized can be accepted on a case-specific basis.....In summary, I conclude the worker suffers from MCS that arose as a compensable consequence of her 1995 occupational exposure [to darkroom chemicals]."
For the full text, see Noteworthy Appeal Decisions sidebar.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Violations of Human Rights
Hello to everyone in the Canadian Darkroom Disease Community.
As a longtime advocate and more recently licensed paralegal, I primarily represent injured workers in Ontario.
Because a number of my clients have DD, I have become very familiar with this condition and the horrendous discrimination to which such individuals are subjected.
It is extremely important to understand that all legislation in Canada, whether federal or provincial is framed within the human rights laws. In other words, unless so specified in a particular law that it is exempt, human rights legislation has primacy over that statute. Of course this is conveniently ignored or obscured by workers' compensation boards.
Nevertheless, the human rights "tool" is one which has not been used nearly enough. As injured workers, those with DD (which, but the way is one of many conditions that fall under the umbrella of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - MCS) are treated very differently than injured workers with evident disabilities.
In Ontario a new regulation under the Accessibiltiy for Ontarians with Disabiities Act (AODA-2005) was enacted on January 1, 2008. It is entitled "Accessibility Standards for Customer Service, Ontario Regulation 429/07. It was made mandatory for numerous agencies on January 1, 2010. This regulation does not simply refer only to physical barriers. The principle of equal opportunity means having the same chance, options, benefits and results as others, In the case of services it means that people with disabilities have the same opportunity to benefit from the way goods and services are provided as others. They should also not have to accept lesser quality or more inconvenience.
It should be noted that the AODA grew out of the Human Rights Code of Ontario and can and should be used along with the Code.
For wcb's to deny benefits to injured workers with DD when those with other more "evident" or "visible" injuries is to treat the DD workers very differently and thus they have been subjected to serious discimination.
I do hope that many more advocates and lawyers will seriously consider using the applicable human rights legislation in conjunction with the workers' compensation legislation.
Although provincial wcb tribunals have the power and authority of "discretion", this power and authority does not give these bodies the rights to subject injured workers to violations of their human rights.
I look forward to receiving your feedback.
Cheers from Ontario
Hilary
As a longtime advocate and more recently licensed paralegal, I primarily represent injured workers in Ontario.
Because a number of my clients have DD, I have become very familiar with this condition and the horrendous discrimination to which such individuals are subjected.
It is extremely important to understand that all legislation in Canada, whether federal or provincial is framed within the human rights laws. In other words, unless so specified in a particular law that it is exempt, human rights legislation has primacy over that statute. Of course this is conveniently ignored or obscured by workers' compensation boards.
Nevertheless, the human rights "tool" is one which has not been used nearly enough. As injured workers, those with DD (which, but the way is one of many conditions that fall under the umbrella of Multiple Chemical Sensitivity - MCS) are treated very differently than injured workers with evident disabilities.
In Ontario a new regulation under the Accessibiltiy for Ontarians with Disabiities Act (AODA-2005) was enacted on January 1, 2008. It is entitled "Accessibility Standards for Customer Service, Ontario Regulation 429/07. It was made mandatory for numerous agencies on January 1, 2010. This regulation does not simply refer only to physical barriers. The principle of equal opportunity means having the same chance, options, benefits and results as others, In the case of services it means that people with disabilities have the same opportunity to benefit from the way goods and services are provided as others. They should also not have to accept lesser quality or more inconvenience.
It should be noted that the AODA grew out of the Human Rights Code of Ontario and can and should be used along with the Code.
For wcb's to deny benefits to injured workers with DD when those with other more "evident" or "visible" injuries is to treat the DD workers very differently and thus they have been subjected to serious discimination.
I do hope that many more advocates and lawyers will seriously consider using the applicable human rights legislation in conjunction with the workers' compensation legislation.
Although provincial wcb tribunals have the power and authority of "discretion", this power and authority does not give these bodies the rights to subject injured workers to violations of their human rights.
I look forward to receiving your feedback.
Cheers from Ontario
Hilary
Friday, January 1, 2010
Three New Jersey Techs Awarded 2.8 million
PRINCETON: X-ray technicians received $2.8 million award
Monday, December 28, 2009 7:38 PM EST
By Lauren Otis, Staff Writer
A jury awarded three technicians at Princeton Regional Orthopedics $942,000 each in compensation for injuries they received because of the improper installation of an X-ray machine in their office.
The $2,826,000 award — to Shellie Austin, Elizabeth Hall and Gail Letizia — was made Dec. 9 following a jury trial from Dec. 7 to 9, according to court records. The trial was presided over by Mercer County Superior Court Judge Thomas W. Summers Jr.
The jury found Pompton Lakes-based A Walsh Imaging Inc. liable for the injuries caused by improper installation and ventilation of the X-ray machine at Princeton Township-based Princeton Regional Orthopedics.
The improper installation and subsequent failure to correct it caused the three technicians, all in their 50s, to inhale caustic gases over an extended period of time, which resulted in permanent respiratory damage for each, according to a release by the Lawrence-based law firm Szaferman, Lakind, Blumstein & Blader. Law firm partner Steven Blader represented the plaintiffs.
According to court records, in January 2006, A Walsh Imaging improperly installed the Princeton Regional Orthopedics X-ray machine without appropriate ventilation, allowing the caustic fumes to escape. The next day, A Walsh Imaging returned, but incorrectly installed a ventilation hose, leading to nine months of further exposure to harmful gases. A third visit did not result in correction of the ventilation problem, which continued into 2007.
Ed Thornton, a partner with the Edison-based law firm Methfessel & Werbel, who represented A Walsh Imaging, said his client had admitted liability during the trial with the jury then needing to determine how much damage the exposure had caused the three women.
”I thought it was a little high,” Mr. Thornton said of the $2.8 million award, “but that’s what the jury awarded.”
There will be no appeal of the award, which already has been paid by A Walsh Imaging’s liability insurer, he said.
Mr. Blader did not return a call seeking comment at deadline.
”As a result of the negligent ventilation of X-ray machines, not just once, but on three occasions, these women were exposed to dangerous chemicals, including gluteraldehyde, over a period of months and will suffer for the rest of their lives. This should never have happened,” Mr. Blader stated in a released statement.
Sherri (Benus) Epstein
Princeton, NJ
Monday, December 28, 2009 7:38 PM EST
By Lauren Otis, Staff Writer
A jury awarded three technicians at Princeton Regional Orthopedics $942,000 each in compensation for injuries they received because of the improper installation of an X-ray machine in their office.
The $2,826,000 award — to Shellie Austin, Elizabeth Hall and Gail Letizia — was made Dec. 9 following a jury trial from Dec. 7 to 9, according to court records. The trial was presided over by Mercer County Superior Court Judge Thomas W. Summers Jr.
The jury found Pompton Lakes-based A Walsh Imaging Inc. liable for the injuries caused by improper installation and ventilation of the X-ray machine at Princeton Township-based Princeton Regional Orthopedics.
The improper installation and subsequent failure to correct it caused the three technicians, all in their 50s, to inhale caustic gases over an extended period of time, which resulted in permanent respiratory damage for each, according to a release by the Lawrence-based law firm Szaferman, Lakind, Blumstein & Blader. Law firm partner Steven Blader represented the plaintiffs.
According to court records, in January 2006, A Walsh Imaging improperly installed the Princeton Regional Orthopedics X-ray machine without appropriate ventilation, allowing the caustic fumes to escape. The next day, A Walsh Imaging returned, but incorrectly installed a ventilation hose, leading to nine months of further exposure to harmful gases. A third visit did not result in correction of the ventilation problem, which continued into 2007.
Ed Thornton, a partner with the Edison-based law firm Methfessel & Werbel, who represented A Walsh Imaging, said his client had admitted liability during the trial with the jury then needing to determine how much damage the exposure had caused the three women.
”I thought it was a little high,” Mr. Thornton said of the $2.8 million award, “but that’s what the jury awarded.”
There will be no appeal of the award, which already has been paid by A Walsh Imaging’s liability insurer, he said.
Mr. Blader did not return a call seeking comment at deadline.
”As a result of the negligent ventilation of X-ray machines, not just once, but on three occasions, these women were exposed to dangerous chemicals, including gluteraldehyde, over a period of months and will suffer for the rest of their lives. This should never have happened,” Mr. Blader stated in a released statement.
Sherri (Benus) Epstein
Princeton, NJ
Monday, December 14, 2009
What is Darkroom Disease?
Darkroom Disease is a cluster of symptoms commonly experienced by those exposed to x-ray film processing fumes. DD is not a condition described per se in medical texts. Two large-scale surveys of radiographers conducted in New Zealand and the UK list the most common symptoms, in descending order of frequency: severe headaches, sore throat/hoarseness; nasal discharge; sore eyes; unexpected fatigue; sinus problems; persistent cold-like symptoms; nausea; painful joints; bad/chemical taste in mouth; mouth ulcers; tinnitus; tight chest; skin rash; lip sores; mouth ulcers; shortness of breath; unusual heart rhythms; chest pains; painful joints; and numb extremities. In Canada Drs G Liss and S Tarlo have described a similar symptom cluster when comparing the health of radiographers to that of physiotherapists.
Asthma is the most widely investigated and published aspect of DD, and, as a result, the National Institute of Health, and other jurisdictions now include those who use formaldehyde or glutaraldehyde to develop x-rays among those at risk of developing occupational asthma. Nevertheless, those of us with asthma commonly experience skepticism and a lack of support when we attempt to bring our concerns to light.
Because DD is not limited to asthma and appears to be a much more complex condition, parallels are being drawn between DD and other multi-symptom, multi-organ conditions like Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Gulf War Syndrome (GWS), fibromyalgia, or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Speaking at the Canadian National Defense Symposium on MCS in 2001, Dr. Claudia Miller, a American researcher in GWS, included radiographers suffering from DD among cohorts suffering from multi-system illness caused by exposure to toxins.
Asthma is the most widely investigated and published aspect of DD, and, as a result, the National Institute of Health, and other jurisdictions now include those who use formaldehyde or glutaraldehyde to develop x-rays among those at risk of developing occupational asthma. Nevertheless, those of us with asthma commonly experience skepticism and a lack of support when we attempt to bring our concerns to light.
Because DD is not limited to asthma and appears to be a much more complex condition, parallels are being drawn between DD and other multi-symptom, multi-organ conditions like Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, Gulf War Syndrome (GWS), fibromyalgia, or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Speaking at the Canadian National Defense Symposium on MCS in 2001, Dr. Claudia Miller, a American researcher in GWS, included radiographers suffering from DD among cohorts suffering from multi-system illness caused by exposure to toxins.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Is there light at the end of the tunnel?
I live in the US.
I am needing some advice from my fellow Darkroom Disease sufferers.
I was offered a _one time non negotiable_ settlement with no medical care, ( my medical care would have to be from my private plan) and no retraining for a different career.
1.) What are the long term effects? I have "Occupational Asthma" and "Allergies" Any articles I can take to my attorney to prove to him I need this medical coverage?
The amount of money offered would allow me to take about a year off and take online schooling for a paralegal certificate (my choice). Can't think of anything else I could do - if you have ideas please let me know! I could work in an office setting once I received my certificate.
1.) Should I have to use my settlement moneys to pay for another education? I already did that once in my life. Should I push for vocational rehabilitation?
If I do not accept the settlement we would go to trial. The settlement is offered for an "allergy" at 15% of my body as a whole. No mention of the asthma. A friend of mine that worked in worker comp for 7 yrs said not to take anything less than 10%. So, I am grateful for the the 15%. I don't want to sound ungrateful or greedy, just wanting something that is fair. I don't like the wording that this is for an "allergy" when I also have asthma from the chemicals. Should I ask for more since it is an allergy and asthma or do they consider the asthma in the "allergy" wording? Also, my attorney thinks once this is settled that I will be "let go" since they can not find me a position that does not affect me in someway. What has been your experience after you left working in the chemicals? Did you feel better? Are you still having issues? I wheeze around hairspray, perfumes, etc. Does this get better with time or does it never go away? (I just received the offer in the mail so I haven't spoken with my attorney about it yet.)
Thanks so much for all of your help!
I am needing some advice from my fellow Darkroom Disease sufferers.
I was offered a _one time non negotiable_ settlement with no medical care, ( my medical care would have to be from my private plan) and no retraining for a different career.
1.) What are the long term effects? I have "Occupational Asthma" and "Allergies" Any articles I can take to my attorney to prove to him I need this medical coverage?
The amount of money offered would allow me to take about a year off and take online schooling for a paralegal certificate (my choice). Can't think of anything else I could do - if you have ideas please let me know! I could work in an office setting once I received my certificate.
1.) Should I have to use my settlement moneys to pay for another education? I already did that once in my life. Should I push for vocational rehabilitation?
If I do not accept the settlement we would go to trial. The settlement is offered for an "allergy" at 15% of my body as a whole. No mention of the asthma. A friend of mine that worked in worker comp for 7 yrs said not to take anything less than 10%. So, I am grateful for the the 15%. I don't want to sound ungrateful or greedy, just wanting something that is fair. I don't like the wording that this is for an "allergy" when I also have asthma from the chemicals. Should I ask for more since it is an allergy and asthma or do they consider the asthma in the "allergy" wording? Also, my attorney thinks once this is settled that I will be "let go" since they can not find me a position that does not affect me in someway. What has been your experience after you left working in the chemicals? Did you feel better? Are you still having issues? I wheeze around hairspray, perfumes, etc. Does this get better with time or does it never go away? (I just received the offer in the mail so I haven't spoken with my attorney about it yet.)
Thanks so much for all of your help!
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Spread the Word!
Welcome Canadian DD pals. Please send this site to those who might benefit from the information or who may have information to share. While we explore this sharing process, you are encouraged to share medical and chemical exposure information but use of a pseudonym is recommended. A google account is required in order to make comments. Click on the "Sign In" and follow the prompts.
Saturday, July 5, 2008
Welcome to our DD community
Some years ago Monique Genton from British Columbia met Wendy Smith from Nova Scotia on Phillipa Martin's SNAAFTA mail list. Phillipa is the daughter of Marjorie Gordon, a New Zealand x-ray technician who developed darkroom disease in the 1980's. Marjorie spent the rest of her life researching and publishing articles on DD with the purpose of educating the world-wide radiology community about the dangers of x-ray film-processing fumes. Phillipa continues her mother's fight for better safety practises. In Canada, Kim Crosby from Ontario has been speaking out about DD for many years.
Knowing that techs who develop DD are often ostracized by their peers, by employers, by the medical profession, and by WCB, Wendy and Monique decided to reach out to other Canadian techs with DD, and for the past 5 years have maintained an informal e-mail practise of providing support and information. It has been most gratifying to place techs in touch with each other as our experiences are remarkably similar. We hope this blog will continue to foster an understanding that we are not alone and that there is a great deal of information to support our struggles. Whether you are new or experienced with DD, we hope you will contribute your stories and ideas.
Knowing that techs who develop DD are often ostracized by their peers, by employers, by the medical profession, and by WCB, Wendy and Monique decided to reach out to other Canadian techs with DD, and for the past 5 years have maintained an informal e-mail practise of providing support and information. It has been most gratifying to place techs in touch with each other as our experiences are remarkably similar. We hope this blog will continue to foster an understanding that we are not alone and that there is a great deal of information to support our struggles. Whether you are new or experienced with DD, we hope you will contribute your stories and ideas.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)