Legal Blog
Legal & Medical Glossary of Terms
Friday, April 25, 2008
Some of the everyday terms used in the medical, legal and insurance professions are not necessarily commonplace to the general public. When dealing with these professionals, the words and terms they use can sound like a foreign language to some of us.
Below are some medical and legal terms which you may find useful:
Accident Benefits: Benefits in the form of money or assistance provided to persons injured in a motor vehicle accident, regardless of who is at fault. Types of accident benefits include: medical and rehabilitation expenses such as equipment, treatment, or therapy, attendant care, income replacement benefits, housekeeping expenses.
Acquired Brain Injury (ABI): An acquired brain injury is damage to the brain that occurs after birth and is not related to a congenital or degenerative disorder, such as Alzheimer’s disease. The damage may be caused by a traumatic (physical) injury to the head or it may be due to strokes, tumours, infections, allergic reactions, anoxia or hypoxia (no or reduced oxygen), or metabolic disorders.
Activities of Daily Living (ADL): Routine activities carried out for personal hygiene and health (including bathing, dressing, feeding) and for operating a household.
Adjuster: one who investigates insurance claims or claims for damages and recommends an effective settlement.
Ambulation: Ability to walk.
Aphasia: Loss of the ability to express oneself and/or to understand language caused by damage to the brain.
Apraxia: Inability to carry out a complex or skilled movement not due to paralysis, sensory changes or deficiencies in understanding.
Arbitration: A process for deciding a legal dispute out of court; a substitute for an ordinary trial.
Ataxia: A problem of muscle coordination caused by a brain lesion. Can interfere with a person’s ability to walk, talk, eat, and perform other self-care tasks.
Atrophy: A wasting away or decrease in size of a cell, tissue, organ or part of the body due to lack of nourishment or loss of nerve supply.
Attendant Care: Attendant Care is any action to assist a person with a disability in accomplishing activities of daily living. These cover a broad spectrum of activities including bathing, dressing, feeding, toileting, transferring, mobility, cooking, cleaning, laundering, dispensing of routine medications and similar tasks. Primarily, these are tasks that the individual is unable to physically perform or has a great deal of difficulty doing.
Case Manager (CM): A rehabilitation professional who coordinates rehabilitation services following an injury.
Cerebellum: The portion of the brain (located at the back) which helps coordinate movement.
Closed Head Injury: Trauma to the head which doesn’t penetrate or fracture the skull but which damages the brain.
Cognition: The conscious process of knowing, becoming or being aware of thoughts or perceptions, including understanding and reasoning.
Coma: A state of unconsciousness from which the patient cannot be aroused, even by powerful stimulation.
Contingency fee: Any fee for services provided where the fee is only payable if there is a favorable result.
CT Scan: A series of x-rays taken at different levels of the brain that allows the direct visualization of intracranial structures.
Damages: The estimated money equivalent for detriment or injury sustained.
Deductible: A clause in an insurance policy that relieves the insurer of responsibility to pay the initial loss up to a stated amount.
Defendant: A person or corporation against whom a claim or charge is brought in a court.
Diffuse Axonal Injury (DAI): A shearing of large nerve fibres in many areas of the brain rather than one specific location.
Disorientation: Not knowing where you are, who you are or the current date.
Electroencephalogram (EEG): A procedure that uses electrodes on the scalp to record electrical activity of the brain.
Frontal Lobe: Front part of the brain; involved in planning, organizing, problem solving, selective attention, personality, and a variety of higher cognitive functions.
Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS): A standardized system used to assess the degree of brain impairment and to identify the seriousness of an injury in relation to outcome.
Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS): A system for classifying the outcome of head injury survivors. Relates to functional independence and not residual deficits.
Hemiparesis: Weakness on one side of the body.
Judgement: Process of forming an opinion, based on an evaluation of the situation at hand in comparison with personal values, preferences and insights.
Limitation Period: a time period after which a lawsuit cannot be brought.
Medical Malpractice: An act or omission by a health care provider which deviates from accepted standards of practice in the medical community and which causes injury to the patient.
Occipital Lobe: Area in the back of the brain whose primary function is processing visual information. Damage to this area can cause visual deficits.
Occupational Therapist (OT): A registered healthcare professional that works to retrain those with injuries to resume the self care activities important to daily living as well as evaluation, training and adaptations to increase function in vocational role.
Paraplegia: Complete paralysis of the lower half of the body including both legs, usually caused by damage to the spinal cord.
Parietal Lobe: Damage to right lobe can cause visual-spatial deficits. Damage to the left lobe may disrupt a patient’s ability to understand spoken and/or written language.
Physical Therapy (PT) or Physiotherapy: The treatment of physical dysfunction or injury by the use of therapeutic exercise and the application of modalities, intended to restore or facilitate normal function or development.
Physiotherapist (PT): A registered healthcare professional who works to maintain and improve the movement and function of joints and limbs.
Plaintiff: The party that institutes a suit in a court. The person or entity the plaintiff sues is the defendant.
Post-Traumatic Amnesia (PTA): A period of hours, days, weeks or months after the injury when the patient exhibits a loss of day-to-day memory. The patient is unable to store new information and has a decreased ability to learn.
Psychiatrist: A physician who specializes in the prevention and management of emotional and behavioural problems with various means including the prescription of psychotropic medication.
Psychologist: An expert in the diagnosis, management and prevention of emotional and behavioural problems who has a doctoral level education.
Quadriplegia: Paralysis of all four limbs or of the entire body below the neck.
Ranchos Los Amigos Scale: A medical scale intended to assess the level of recovery of brain injury patients and those recovering from coma. It is named after the Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center in Los Angeles.
Range of Motion (ROM): Refers to movement of a joint and is important to prevent contractures.
Rehab Support Worker: A rehab professional who assists or instructs injured persons in the development of independent living and personal care skills, monitoring health and safety needs and providing structured outings in the community to assist in reintegration.
Retrograde Amnesia: Inability to recall events prior to the accident. May be a specific span of time or type of information.
Social Worker (SW): Expert in the social, emotional, and financial needs of families and patients. They often help locate services that are needed.
Speech and Language Pathologist (SLP): A regulated healthcare professional responsible for the evaluation and treatment of problems with speech and language, auditory, cognitive (comprehension), attention, writing, reading and expression skills.
Temporal Lobes: Right temporal lobe is mainly involved in visual memory. Left temporal lobe is mainly involved in verbal memory.
Tort: Damage, injury, or a wrongful act done wilfully, negligently, or in circumstances involving strict liability, but not involving breach of contract, for which a civil suit can be brought.
References:
http://traumaticbraininjury.net/glossary.html
www.dictionary.com
www.aboutkidshealth.ca
www.spinalcord.ar.gov
www.wikepedia.com
www.thefreedictionary.com
- Top
- Comments
More on Disability and Deduction
Thursday, April 03, 2008
Back in an entry titled Social Assistance and ODSP Recipients dated, Wednesday, February 20, 2008 we discussed deduction in the context of plaintiff injury compensation. The case of Mule v. The Director of the Ontario Disability Support Program of The Ministry of Community and Social Services, released in November 2007 is good news for injured Plaintiffs who receive social assistance.
The Appellant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and ended up settling his claim in December 2004. He received disability payments pursuant to the Ontario Disability Support Program Act in December 2003.
The Director determined that part of the settlement representing the prejudgment interest did not constitute "damages or compensation for pain and suffering as a result of injury" within the meaning of s. 43(1)4 of O.Reg. 222/98, and so it did not constitute exempt income for the purpose of calculating the appellant’s entitlement to disability benefits. The Social Benefits Tribunal affirmed that decision, reasoning that prejudgment interest constitutes damages for delay, not damages for pain and suffering. The appellant appealed.
Held:
The court allowed the appeal. The Regulation exempts from income "damages or compensation for pain and suffering". The most appropriate meaning to give to the word “for” in this context is “having as a reason or cause”. As a result of injuries sustained by the appellant, he was entitled to damages. As a result of the fact that those damages were paid four years after the accident, he was entitled to prejudgment interest. However, the entitlement to prejudgment interest was dependent on the entitlement to damages, and could not exist independently. Both damages and prejudgment interest were paid “for” the pain and suffering that resulted from the appellant’s injuries. The prejudgment interest was exempted from income.
Huge award for loss of competitive advantage
Thursday, February 28, 2008
In the case of St.Prix-Alexander v. Home Depot of Canada Inc. Justice Manton awarded $400,000 for loss of competitive advantage. This is an extremely favourable sum for the Plaintiff. She was injured at a Home Depot in 1999 and sustained injuries.
Although, she subsequently did return to work in August 2000 at four days a week as Executive Assistant to Marcel Nouvet, an associate Deputy Minister who was the Chief of the Human Resources office at Treasury Board of Canada she eventually left in 2006 and started to receive long term disability benefits.
At the trial in 2007 she stated that she could no longer work because of the injuries she sustained.
Despite, the fact the trial judge stated, “I agree with the solicitor for the defence who said in his argument that it seems that at every opportunity, the plaintiff exaggerated her medical condition. I find that on several occasions, she was not entirely truthful in her answers” he still awarded her $400,000.
Even more interesting, when considering the income loss and loss of competitive advantage he stated:
It is clear that the Plaintiff was injured in the accident at Home Depot and that the injury sustained by her caused her a lot of inconvenience and suffering however, I do not believe that she will be unable to work in the future. Her doctor did not recommend that she cease working. It was a decision she made on her own and the doctors were faced with a “fait accompli” because she felt that she could not go back to work. She is now on long-term disability and receiving 70% of her salary but there was no evidence introduced at the trial to indicate the medical reason why she is on long-term disability. I have no doubt she has a loss of competitive advantage because of the injuries sustained by her and she will suffer economic loss because of the fact that she can no longer work 60 hours per week and her ability to compete for employment has been impaired. She can no longer accept jobs that demand a lot of concentration and as stressful as an Executive Assistant. She will therefore be less attractive to her employer than a comparable individual not impaired in any way. The fact that she is now unable to work at the Executive 1 or 2 levels in the Public Service is compensable in damages.
Therefore, even though he did not believe she would never be able to work again he did buy the loss of competitive advantage argument. This is an excellent ruling for Plaintiff counsel.
Employers being sued for employee cellphone use
Friday, February 22, 2008
The National Post reported today that employers who provide company cellphones to their employees who end up getting into motor vehicle accidents can be held liable. The story can be found by clicking here.
Essentially, if the employee was on the job at the time, driving and using his or her company cellphone the employer could be held liable for personal injury damages. The Post reported that while there are no such cases in Canada there have been in the United States. Moreover, the Plaintiffs were successful. The American cases cited by the article resulted in extremely large settlements.
This is certainly a very interesting perspective regarding motor vehicle litigation. The trend in the United States could very well carry over into Canada. However, in Canada we won’t be getting the large settlements as in the United States. But at least this will allow a Plaintiff access to a new pocket that is often deep.
Employers who expect their employees to be on call all the time for the purposes of business owe a duty of care to an injured party when that employee is negligent.
Social Assistance and ODSP recipients
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Accidents happen to everyone. However, if you were receiving social assistance or disability payments you must be aware of some important factors.
Generally, the government of Ontario has a right to "claw back" any money a person received from a legal settlement for a wrongful act. This can come into effect if you were receiving payments before or after the accident.
As a recipient you are obliged to notify the government about any possible monies you might receive from a legal settlement for a wrongful act. Typically, the government will require one to sign an assignment which basically gives the government the right to take their portion of monies paid to you from your settlement. Failure to execute the assignment can result in a suspension of payments to the recipients.
Thankfully, there are some exemptions that do apply with respect to what the government can't touch. In an award for damages from a wrongful act under the Ontario Disability Support Program, $100,000 can be exempt. In the case of an award for damages under the Ontario Works Act $25,000 can be exempt. Both exemptions apply to awards for damages that deal with pain and suffering only.
For more information with respect to the exemptions its best to talk to an Ontario personal injury lawyer.
At the law firm of Neinstein & Associates we have a dedicated and knowledgeable team of lawyers who have considerable expertise about legal settlements and the exemptions.
A great day for injured Albertans
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
A court in Alberta has found the general cap on minor pain and suffering damages being $4000 unconstitutional as it violates section 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom.
This is a very significant win for Plaintiff lawyers and their clients in Alberta. The $4000 cap has been the focus of much debate.
The government of course is appealing the decision. If the government is unsuccessful in their appeal Alberta will have to revamp their entire structure with respect to the damages cap.
For additional information click here.
Insurance Scam in Toronto
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
The Toronto Star reported yesterday, Car crashes staged for insurance scam Toronto Police have arrested 14 people related to $650,000 in accident claims. It has been alleged that wrecked vehicles were purchased, repaired and insured for far more than the vehicles were worth and then placed in staged accidents. In total, the Toronto Star reported that 7 accidents were staged.
Among some of the groups arrested and still under investigation are auto-dealers, auto-body shops and tow truck drivers. Some individuals made claims to the insurance company and were never even involved in the accident.
This is very unfortunate and the repercussions of fraudulent activities such as this hurt everyone not just the insurance company. This type of fraud has the potential to really injure people. As it did in March 2003 when an innocent women was killed in a staged accident. It can cause ambulance, fire and police services to become tied up and not attend to serious accidents which is particularly important during these icy, cold and snowy days. Finally, insurance fraud causes the insurance company to become even more vigilant in their investigation of a claim. The Insurance Bureau of Canada reports on its website that over 26% of personal injury claims contain some elements of fraud.
Hopefully, the insurance companies will not let the actions of a few bad apples ruin it for those who are actually involved and injured in motor vehicle accidents.
It is imperative that people are honest with their insurance companies when they first purchase insurance and that they are aware of what they are going to receive. Also, the insured should be forthright at all times in their dealings with the insurer. The last thing you want is to raise eyebrows that prompt unnecessary investigations that will only delay a claim.
For more information on insurance fraud refer to the paper entitled, Insurance Impact Statement-Personal Injury Fraud published by The Insurance Bureau of Canada. The Insurance Bureau of Canada has a very strong and effective lobby. An increase of insurance fraud schemes such as the one mentioned above have the potential to hurt all especially you!