Blame the Victim in Workers Compensation Cases?

Recently, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that injuries that were caused by a claimant’s smoking habit can be separated from his injuries resulting from asbestos exposure. The Court reduced the award for the injured worker based upon his concurrent conditions. Thomas B. Scheffey, Law.com 8/14/08

 

Currently, in Maryland an injured worker can be compensated for his pre existing conditions, if his injuries from the accident and his pre existing conditions make that worker eligible for recovery from the Subsequent Injury Fund. 

 

Similarly, in the District of Columbia, an injured worker can be compensated for his pre existing conditions as if the industrial accident caused the entire disability. 

 

It would be devastating to injured workers in both Maryland and the District of Columbia, if these benefits were taken away.   An injured worker who has certain obstacles or hindrances to employment, who later suffers an injury and cannot return to work or even their pre injury job because of the combined effects of injury from the accident and the preexisting conditions would be put in a position where they cannot return to work because of (at least in part) that pre-existing condition.  Usually, these provisions come in to play in older claimants. How good is a scheme of workers compensation benefits that does not protect older workers?