Question: Has anyone been threatened with a denial for a settlement claim for refusing to take a recommended drug (biologic)?
I was injured at work two years ago with a diagnosis of carpal tunnel, which was diagnosed as RA three months after that. I had always been active and a hard-worker. It's my understanding that it's very difficult to win any compensation with an RA diagnosis to begin with (although I didn't know that I had it at all until the 'blow-out'), but the defense is refusing to compensate due to my not wanting to take a biologic. I'm scared to try a biologic, as those of us with RA are already threatened with cancer and I don't want to add to the threat with a biologic. Am I being unreasonable? Do we not have a say in what treatments we want to pursue? I've been backed into a corner and I don't know what to do. The court date is pending...