Trauma is not an occupational disease
If a police officer is traumatized by the sighting of child pornography and violence, it is not considered an occupational disease. This is the ruling of the Federal Supreme Court.
A Zurich city police officer suffered post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of constant visions of child pornography and depictions of violence. But the accident insurance of the city of Zurich refused to pay benefits.
As reported by the news agency SDA, the Federal Court has now ruled that this should not be considered an occupational disease. No predominant connection between illness and occupation could be proven.
The requirements for proving an occupational disease are high, as the Federal Supreme Court states in its ruling published on Friday. The reason is the intention of the legislator not to blur the boundary between illness and occupational disease under insurance law.
Therefore, it is required that an insured person was exposed to a typical occupational risk for a certain period of time. In each individual case, it must be proven whether the occupational activity caused the illness strongly predominantly or exclusively.
In the case of the Zurich city police officer, who was insured with the accident insurance of the city of Zurich, the cantonal lower court still came to the conclusion that the psychological complaints were a consequence of the experiences from his everyday working life. It therefore assumed an occupational disease.
The Federal Court has now overturned this decision. It based its decision on an SUVA expert opinion. The police officer in question had a variety of previous charges dating back to childhood, among other things.
It could therefore not be assumed that the stress disorder had been caused by the professional activity to at least 75 percent. (Judgment 8C_507/2015 of 06.01.2016)
