Wishing all injured people a decent, painfree Xmas

5 Responses to Wishing all injured people a decent, painfree Xmas

1. 

   Ben December 24, 2011 at 12:12 PM #

   Gettin’ into this whole christmas cheer stuff, huh…

   Ben.

   Reply
   • 

     workcovervictim December 24, 2011 at 1:54 PM #

     I am personally not getting into any xmas cheer, but it remains a time to reflect and to think about all those close to me, including ALL injured workcover (and TAC) victims, who perhaps like me, don’t have the means for cheer or just don’t feel up to it.

     It’s also a time to say thank you to all who have helped me along the way, this year, and this includes all of you, readers, commentators and contributors! And all my medical treaters (you know who you are).

     My “Xmas” this year is about being grateful to still be alive (especially with my heart injury).

     This will be celebrated (tonight) with a crispy duck with home made pancakes, courtesy of my local Chinese/Vietnamese take away shop – who offered to prepare the lot for $50 (a whole duck, 20 pancakes and the veggies)! No booze, I am up to my eye balls on narcotics, thank you.

     What and How are you guys “celebrating”? Surely there must be something you are still grateful for?

     Reply
2. 

   Careful December 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM #

   Just remember not to engage in too much cheer as Mr Rod Trevor (and those of his ilk) http://aworkcovervictimsdiary.com/2011/12/i-spy-with-my-little-workcover-eye-over-christmas/ may be watching your activities.

   That aside, I wish the Webmaster and all regular readers of this blog a wonderful Christmas break. Chin up, 2012 is going to be our year!

   Reply
   • 

     workcovervictim December 24, 2011 at 2:07 PM #

     I wonder if Mr Trevor would interpret a forced “cheese” smile as evidence for being “jolly” and “happy” and therefore “pain free” and certainly not “depressed” or affected in any (bad) way by our injuries? No wonder the scum bag wants to offer to take advantage of the Xmas period! Isn’t that precisely how they get their 5 seconds famous “evidence”?

     Reply
3. 

   Ben December 24, 2011 at 2:47 PM #

   I think the courts have a lot to answer for, entertaining evidence collected that way.

   Any psych’ll basically tell you that putting people in a position of “make the best of it and smile despite the pain and suffering – but lose your rights to live much of a life though losing any compensation” and “being ultra consistent, grumpy the whole time, and maintain your rights” is just simply a ridiculous, unreasonable and unjust position to put people in.

   People with injuries should be smiling as much as they can, lauging as much as they can, not plodding around to meet some ridiculous standard of evidence.  And even if you meet that standard of evidence, they’ll basically just call you a faker anyway.

   Courts, and the ombudsman definitely have a case to answer here for allowing an incentive system that sets up “lose lose” for victims, in a system that is *supposed* to protect and support victims.   Bad faith — you bet.  Maximum bad faith.

   What’s worse — listen to the politicians talking about the refugee situation, where they clearly describe the problems with “incentives predicting behaviour” better than the rules — it lends *extremely strong* evidence that the government knows damn well that it’s *outright stealing theiving* from victims pockets, basically because they can get away with it.

   The public need to know — they leave us victims “to fix ourselves” under the false belief that them paying the insurance premium means we get looked after “well enough” — it’s simply not true, but try and convince people that’s the way it is.  They’ll disagree, as the media campaigns paint a rosy picture of them giving christmas gifts to needy children.   And subsequently, people refuse to help, or act to fix things.

   These insurance companies should be banned from advertising.  They should be required to fulfill the *full* entitlement victims claim allowable under the law — and do fraud checking.   Basically, nothing should ever be denied payment.  It should all be claimed back by accusing the victim (or doctors) of fraud and having the case for fraud be heard by a court.   That way, the incentive system is for full entitlements to be paid, promptly, and for the primary focus of the victim to be on getting better, not being abused.

   The most helpful time to have money is early, so as to reduce the financial stress that goes along with the injury.   Psychological costs of for being an abused insurance victim are also a cost to society.   The loss of productivity due to a stressed, drained, and “more damaged than they should be worker, by being forced back to work before they’ve healed”   ….   We shoudln’t allow the insurance companies to run this scam because not only is it increasing the costs of the system for everyone, and reducing the benefits paid to victims, but it has a large number of indirect costs to society, that increases the taxation burden, and the personal burden to anyone who knows a victim.  (most people surely DO know a victim — you probably don’t talk to them any more because they were so stressed out all the time, that they stressed you out, so you blocked them, deleted their phone numbers and refused to talk to them.   They need your help.  They need our help.   Call them.  Offer them a hug.  Tell them you’re going to write to your MP on their belhalf.)

   Everyone deserves a christmas, not just people who “haven’t been unlucky yet”

   Ben.

   Reply

Leave a Reply Click here to cancel reply.