Cases

On Motion for Rehearing/Clarification. Original opinion at 30 FLW D57. Prior opinion withdrawn. Claimant’s caretaker testified that she provided "on call" attendant care for periods in which she would call the claimant from work to check on her. Court determined that a caretaker cannot be compensated for providing attendant care for time spent outside of the claimant’s presence, even if the caretaker is considered "on call."

Not all attendant care services are compensable. Normally, only direct care that is medically necessary is compensable. Attendant care considered medically necessary includes bathing, dressing, administering medication, and assisting with sanitary functions. On the other hand, housekeeping, transportation other than to a doctor and other normal household duties that reflect on quality of life rather than medical necessity are generally considered gratuitous and not compensable. Household services may, in limited circumstances, be compensable if the caretaker (family member or not) substantially departs from his or her daily routine to provide care, or if the claimant is completely prevented from doing such activities on his or her own. No distinction was made in the judge’s order between time spent providing compensable care and non-compensable care. Case remanded to JCC to determine the amount of compensable care provided.