Injured child-not hospitalized

KP68

In our efforts to cautionary with FMLA (meaning, not just approving "everything" that appears eligible to start the 12 week clock ticking), I have a question. Employee is eligible, and her child was injured at school but was not hospitalized. She missed three days of work to stay home with him (hit in the eye w/a rock).

I don't mean to sound insensitive like she shouldn't have stayed with him, but would this qualify although he was not hospitalized and she stayed home for three days? After looking at my "FMLA Decision Tree" posted on my wall, it asks if injuries result in hospitalization in excess of 3 days and requires treatment of a HCP. No hospitalization in this case, but there was an initial treatment.
Again, we do not want to seem insensitive, but as you all know, we cannot just approve everything under FMLA.
Hopefully a simple questio- within a long message.
Thanks.

POPEYE

Section 825.306 (5)(i)of the REGS addresses this issue. In part "whether the patient (family member)requires assistance for basic medical or personal needs or safety, or for transportation; or if not, whether the employee's presence to provide psychological comfort would be beneficial to the patient or assist in the patient's recovery."

No where does it state that the qualifying family member must be hospitalized.

I attended a semimar a few years ago and the presenting attorney made this statement that has stuck with me: "Put yourself in your EE's shoes and if you would want entitlement for the situation and it remotely appears like it would qualify, approve it. You won't be questioned about being too lenient as long as you are consistent."

KP68

Believe me, we are always empathetic in situations like this. And we would not have denied her this time, because I feel it wouldn't have been the right thing to do. My question was probably more rhetorical in nature, based upon what information I was going by, in terms of leave needed for a sick child. The situations where a child has a minor cold, etc., has come up, and this is where we struggle with these scenarios.
Thank you for your detailed response...oh, and just in case you were curious as to where I found the info on hospitalization (short of reading the detailed regs), here is a link to a similar "FMLA Decision Tree" that I refer to.


[url]http://www.lrims.com/FMLA_Decision_Tree.html[/url]

Carey

I would either throw away that decision tree or get out my pen and make some additions to it. A serious health condition is not only one that requires hospitalization. The situation you describe sounds like it would qualify because the child was "incapacitated for more than three calendar days from work, school or other regular daily activities that also involves continuing treatment by a health care provider." (Even if it was only 3 school days, there could have been a weekend of incapacity in there also.)

Sally

I agree that the situation should be covered, but then I just went through a similar scenario myself when my 16-year old suffered an eye injury at school. Once we were finished with the two-day round of doctors I was comfortable leaving him home alone, with phone calls from me to remind him to take his meds. It would have been a different situation with my 10-year old--not old enough to be home alone and not old enough to do his meds himself.
All factors need to be taken into account, and the age of the children is one of those factors.