Per the laws involved here, “permanent disability” means something like paralysis from a spinal injury, or loss of organ function due to acute critical illness like a necrotic bowel or something. Unfortunately, according to the medical and legal literature on the topic, disability from pain or chronic disease is beyond the required services of an ER. Arguments can be made for acute-on-chronic situations like splenic damage or rupture in sickle cell crisis, but those areas can get pretty fuzzy.
That’s a shame. Under disability law, permanent disability is legally defined as a loss of mental or physical function to the point of significantly reducing one’s ability to work or perform daily activities for an indefinite period.
It’s ironic that medical disability considers the loss of a limb as a permanent disability but not permanent pain and suffering, because I’d gladly trade my leg to know what it’s like not to be in pain again and to be treated like a person with a visible disability.
I think you misunderstood. EMTALA defines disability in relation to an emergent condition, injury, or acute illness. The degradation of a chronic condition into a disability is not something that an ER can or should be trying to treat. Disability as a whole can include things like chronic pain in addition to other neuropathies, parasthesias, or paralysis, but the definition of “disability” in terms of emergency medical care is entirely related to the disability being caused by an emergency medical problem, not a chronic one.
I think you are the one misunderstanding here. The medical neglect during my ER visit is what caused my disability. I’m not asking to be treated for chronic pain at the ER, I’m asking to be treated so that I would not have become disabled.
