THUNDER BAY — The lawyer for a woman mauled by a bear north of Thunder Bay seven years ago says a tribunal's decision to award loss of employment benefits "moves the yardsticks" for considering the impact of post-traumatic stress disorder.
The Workplace Safety Insurance Board had denied those benefits for an 18-month period that the worker was away from the government ministry she had worked for.
Suzanne Dajczak, based in Windsor, represented the woman in a case heard earlier this year by the WSI Appeals Tribunal.
Her client was severely injured in the bear attack that lasted 10 minutes during a field trip in October 2011. Until a helicopter arrived about 90 minutes later, the animal remained nearby, leaving her uncertain whether it would attack again.
The woman sustained massive trauma to her head and other parts of her body, requiring an extended hospitalization as well as prolonged outpatient care.
Four months after she was mauled, she woman began a graduated return to work program.
But near the end of 2012, her contract expired, and the only new position available involved extensive field work which she felt she would be unable to take on.
The woman told the tribunal she suffered severe anxiety on two field trips to the bush after she went back to work. "She experienced high rushes of adrenaline every time a twig would snap...She felt that at any moment she was ready to cry and was exhausted within a few moments," a tribunal document reads. She was only able to go on field trips with a minimum group of three people.
Her supervisor and co-workers were very supportive, she said, but with no suitable job available in December 2012, the woman left the ministry.
In 2013, she fell into depression, had lost her self-confidence, and decided she needed to get out of the "safety bubble" she was in with her family, and try to restore her sense of independence. She visited friends overseas that year, and testified that she returned home feeling more stable psychologically.
However, when she was offered another ministry contract job requiring going into the bush, she declined, and took two university courses as she considered changing her career path.
In February 2014. after a specialist finally diagnosed her with PTSD—more than two years after the attack—the WSIB granted her entitlement for a psychotraumatic disability.
She resumed employment with the ministry, but the WSIB subsequently denied her claim for LOE benefits for the period she had been off work, determining that she had voluntarily terminated her employment.
In granting her appeal, the tribunal ruled that the psychological disability she had suffered originated with the "horrific injuries" she suffered in the bear attack.
As such, it said, she was entitled to benefits, including health care treatment and work transition services, for her disability from the date of the incident.
The panel found that had the worker received the services she was entitled to "it is most likely that her psychological disability would have been diagnosed earlier." It also determined that had work transition services been available, the WSIB would have learned that her return to the bush was not a suitable occupation for her.
With regard to her travel abroad, the panel said "it is unusual to grant loss of earnings benefits in such circumstances. However...it is justified in the circumstances because the worker's decision to visit friends was a reasonable attempt to address the PTSD symptoms she was experiencing."
"She should not be penalized," it said, "for taking reasonable and responsible measures of self treatment."
In an interview with Tbnewswatch, Dajczak said the case is important because it brings to light how PTSD can manifest itself differently in the lives of different individuals.
"In this case, the tribunal recognized that we don't always recognize the symptoms and don't always get immediate treatment," she said.
Dajczak feels the case shows why the WSIB policy for traumatic mental stress has to consider "some of those details that could have been occurring with an individual. Are they becoming withdrawn, are they unable to cope with certain situations?"
Noting that the tribunal placed emphasis on what her client was going through during the period she was off work, she said the case "moves the yard sticks forward, absolutely. It granted benefits where normally they wouldn't have been, having regard for a very special situation."
