PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
We conducted a comprehensive review of state workers\' compensation laws in the United States to evaluate the extent to which they support first responders with mental injury. Most state workers\' compensation systems divide mental injuries into categories based on their presumed etiology: physical-mental, mental-physical, and mental-mental. Major differences exist among states as to which workers are eligible. Proving workplace causation can be difficult where no traumatic physical injuries exist. Latency periods, time limits, preexisting health conditions, restrictions as to types of condition covered, and complex chains of causation may make this burden, which falls on the claimant, even more challenging. Only nine (9) states enacted presumption of causation laws for mental health conditions to ease claimants\' burden of proof. This contrasts starkly with presumption laws for chronic and infectious diseases. State decision-makers should create presumptions that mental health conditions in first responders are caused or significantly exacerbated by their stressful workplaces.
摘要：
我们对美国州工人的赔偿法律进行了全面审查，以评估他们在多大程度上支持有精神伤害的急救人员。大多数国家工人的赔偿制度根据其假定的病因将精神伤害分为几类：身体-精神，心理-身体，和精神精神。各州之间在哪些工人有资格方面存在重大差异。在没有创伤性身体伤害的情况下，证明工作场所因果关系可能很困难。延迟期间,时间限制,预先存在的健康状况，对所涵盖条件类型的限制，复杂的因果关系链可能会造成这种负担，落在索赔人身上，更具挑战性。只有九（9）个州颁布了关于精神健康状况的因果关系法律推定，以减轻索赔人的举证责任。这与慢性和传染病的推定法形成鲜明对比。国家决策者应假定急救人员的心理健康状况是由紧张的工作场所引起或严重加剧的。
