Statement of Principles concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 74 of 2020)

Administered by Department of Veterans' Affairs

Legislation au F2020L01391 In force Legislative Instrument

Legislation content

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

 

STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES CONCERNING

SPINAL ADHESIVE ARACHNOIDITIS

(REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS) (NO. 74 OF 2020)

 

VETERANS' ENTITLEMENTS ACT 1986

MILITARY REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION ACT 2004

 

  1. This is the Explanatory Statement to the Statement of Principles concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 74 of 2020).

Background

2.             The Repatriation Medical Authority (the Authority), under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA), repeals Instrument No. 116 of 2011 (Federal Register of Legislation No. F2011L01748) determined under subsection 196B(2) of the VEA concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis.

3.             The Authority is of the view that there is sound medical-scientific evidence that indicates that spinal adhesive arachnoiditis and death from spinal adhesive arachnoiditis can be related to particular kinds of service.  The Authority has therefore determined pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the VEA a Statement of Principles concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 74 of 2020).  This Instrument will in effect replace the repealed Statement of Principles.

Purpose and Operation

4.             The Statement of Principles will be applied in determining claims under the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA).

5.             The Statement of Principles sets out the factors that must as a minimum exist, and which of those factors must be related to the following kinds of service rendered by a person:

 operational service under the VEA;

 peacekeeping service under the VEA;

 hazardous service under the VEA;

 British nuclear test defence service under the VEA;

 warlike service under the MRCA;

 non-warlike service under the MRCA,

before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised connecting spinal adhesive arachnoiditis or death from spinal adhesive arachnoiditis, with the circumstances of that service.  The Statement of Principles has been determined for the purposes of both the VEA and the MRCA.

6.             This Instrument results from an investigation notified by the Authority in the Government Notices Gazette of 6 November 2018 concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis in accordance with section 196G of the VEA.  The investigation involved an examination of the sound medical-scientific evidence now available to the Authority, including the sound medical-scientific evidence it has previously considered.

7.             The contents of this Instrument are in similar terms as the repealed Instrument.  Comparing this Instrument and the repealed Instrument, the differences include:

  • adopting the latest revised Instrument format, which commenced in 2015;
  • specifying a day of commencement for the Instrument in section 2;
  • revising the definition of 'spinal adhesive arachnoiditis' in subsection 7(2);
  • revising the factors in subsections 9(1) and 9(18) concerning having severe spinal trauma involving the affected site;
  • revising the factors in subsections 9(2) and 9(19) concerning undergoing spinal surgery involving the affected site;
  • new factors in subsections 9(3) and 9(20) concerning having a lumboperitoneal shunt at the affected site;
  • revising the factors in subsections 9(4) and 9(21) concerning having an epidural blood patch;
  • new factors in subsections 9(5) and 9(22) concerning having a myelogram involving an injection of oil-soluble intrathecal radiological contrast agent;
  • new factors in subsections 9(6) and 9(23) concerning having a myelogram involving an injection of water-soluble intrathecal radiological contrast agent;
  • new factors in subsections 9(7) and 9(24) concerning having an injection of Thorotrast (thorium dioxide suspension) into the subarachnoid space;
  • revising the factor in subsection 9(8) concerning having intrathecal injection of methylprednisolone acetate (Depo-Medrol), for clinical onset only;
  • new factors in subsections 9(9) and 9(25) concerning having an in situ intrathecal drug delivery system at the affected site;
  • new factors in subsections 9(10) and 9(26) concerning having intrathecal injection of methotrexate or cytosine arabinoside;
  • new factors in subsections 9(11) and 9(27) concerning having intrathecal injection of radioactive gold at the affected site;
  • revising the factors in subsections 9(12) and 9(28) concerning having an infection from the specified list of infections;
  • revising the factor in subsection 9(14) concerning having a spinal subdural haematoma at the affected site, for clinical onset;
  • new factors in subsections 9(15) and 9(31) concerning having ankylosing spondylitis involving the affected site;
  • new factors in subsections 9(16) and 9(32) concerning having an intervertebral disc prolapse causing spinal stenosis at the affected site;
  • new factors in subsections 9(17) and 9(33) concerning having sarcoidosis;
  • revising the factor in subsection 9(29) concerning having a subarachnoid haemorrhage, for clinical worsening;
  • deleting the factors concerning having an intraspinal myelogram, as these are now covered by the factors in subsections 9(5) and 9(22) concerning having a myelogram involving an injection of oil-soluble intrathecal radiological contrast agent, the factors in subsections 9(6) and 9(23) concerning having a myelogram involving an injection of water-soluble intrathecal radiological contrast agent and the factors in subsections 9(7) and 9(24) concerning having an injection of Thorotrast (thorium dioxide suspension) into the subarachnoid space;
  • deleting the factors concerning having an epidural catheter left in situ;
  • deleting the factor concerning being treated with intrathecal methylprednisolone acetate (Depo-Medrol), for clinical worsening only;
  • deleting the factors concerning having an injury from a dural puncture involving the affected site;
  • new definitions of 'MRCA', 'specified list of infections', 'specified list of radiological contrast agents' and 'VEA' in Schedule 1 - Dictionary;
  • revising the definitions of 'relevant service' and 'severe spinal trauma' in Schedule 1 - Dictionary; and
  • deleting the definitions of 'an infection from the specified list', 'an injury from a dural puncture' and 'ICD-10-AM code'.

Consultation

8.             Prior to determining this Instrument, the Authority advertised its intention to undertake an investigation in relation to spinal adhesive arachnoiditis in the Government Notices Gazette of 6 November 2018, and circulated a copy of the notice of intention to investigate to a wide range of organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants.  The Authority invited submissions from the Repatriation Commission, the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, organisations and persons referred to in section 196E of the VEA, and any person having expertise in the field.  No submissions were received for consideration by the Authority in relation to the investigation.

9.             On 15 June 2020, the Authority wrote to organisations representing veterans, service personnel and their dependants regarding the proposed Instrument and the medical-scientific material considered by the Authority.  This letter emphasised the deletion of factors relating to having an injury from a dural puncture involving the affected site within the five years before the clinical onset of spinal adhesive arachnoiditis, having an epidural catheter left in situ for a continuous period of at least 24 hours at the affected site, within the five years before the clinical onset of spinal adhesive arachnoiditis, having an injury from a dural puncture involving the affected site within the two years before the clinical worsening of spinal adhesive arachnoiditis, having an epidural catheter left in situ for a continuous period of at least 24 hours at the affected site, within the two years before the clinical worsening of spinal adhesive arachnoiditis and being treated with intrathecal methylprednisolone acetate (Depo-Medrol) within the one year before the clinical worsening of spinal adhesive arachnoiditis. The Authority provided an opportunity to the organisations to make representations in relation to the proposed Instrument prior to its determination.  No submissions were received for consideration by the Authority.  Minor changes were made to the proposed Instrument following this consultation process.

Human Rights

10.         This instrument is compatible with the Human Rights and Freedoms recognised or declared in the International Instruments listed in Section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.  A Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights follows.

 

 

Finalisation of Investigation

11.         The determining of this Instrument finalises the investigation in relation to spinal adhesive arachnoiditis as advertised in the Government Notices Gazette of 6 November 2018.

References

12.         A list of references relating to the above condition is available on the Authority’s website at: www.rma.gov.au. Any other document referred to in this Statement of Principles is available on request to the Repatriation Medical Authority at the following address:

              

  Email:    info@rma.gov.au

  Post:      The Registrar

Repatriation Medical Authority

GPO Box 1014

BRISBANE    QLD    4001

 


Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights

(Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011)

 

Instrument No.:   Statement of Principles No. 74 of 2020

Kind of Injury, Disease or Death: Spinal adhesive arachnoiditis

 

This Legislative Instrument is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview of the Legislative Instrument

1. This Legislative Instrument is determined pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (the VEA) for the purposes of the VEA and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (the MRCA).  Part XIA of the VEA requires the determination of these instruments outlining the factors connecting particular kinds of injury, disease or death with service such being determined solely on the available sound medical-scientific evidence.

2. This Legislative Instrument:-

  • facilitates claimants in making, and the Repatriation Commission and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission in assessing, claims under the VEA and the MRCA respectively, by specifying the circumstances in which medical treatment and compensation can be extended to eligible persons who have spinal adhesive arachnoiditis;
  • facilitates the review of such decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal;
  • outlines the factors which the current sound medical-scientific evidence indicates must as a minimum exist, before it can be said that a reasonable hypothesis has been raised, connecting spinal adhesive arachnoiditis with the circumstances of eligible service rendered by a person, as set out in clause 5 of the Explanatory Statement;
  • replaces Instrument No. 116 of 2011; and
  • reflects developments in the available sound medical-scientific evidence concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis which have occurred since that earlier instrument was determined. 

3. The Instrument is assessed as being a technical instrument which improves the medico-scientific quality of outcomes under the VEA and the MRCA. 

Human Rights Implications

4. This Legislative Instrument does not derogate from any human rights. It promotes the human rights of veterans, current and former Defence Force members as well as other persons such as their dependents, including:

  • the right to social security (Art 9, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Art 26, Convention on the Rights of the Child and Art 28, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities) by helping to ensure that the qualifying conditions for the benefit are 'reasonable, proportionate and transparent'[1];
  • the right to an adequate standard of living (Art 11, ICSECR; Art 27, CRC and Art 28, CRPD) by facilitating the assessment and determination of social security benefits;
  • the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (Art 12, ICSECR and Art 25, CRPD), by facilitating the assessment and determination of compensation and benefits in relation to the treatment and rehabilitation of veterans and Defence Force members;
  • the rights of persons with disabilities by facilitating the determination of claims relating to treatment and rehabilitation (Art 26, CRPD); and
  • ensuring that those rights "will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status" (Art 2, ICESCR).

Conclusion

This Legislative Instrument is compatible with human rights as it does not derogate from and promotes a number of human rights.

 

Repatriation Medical Authority

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] In General Comment No. 19 (The right to social security), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights said (at paragraph 24) this to be one of the elements of ensuring accessibility to social security.

Overview

The Statement of Principles concerning Spinal Adhesive Arachnoiditis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 74 of 2020) is an instrument enacted under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. This legislation was introduced to address the problem of determining the eligibility of veterans and current or former Defence Force members for benefits related to spinal adhesive arachnoiditis, a condition that can arise from specific kinds of service. The Repatriation Medical Authority, pursuant to subsection 196B(2) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, determined this Statement of Principles following an investigation into the sound medical-scientific evidence linking spinal adhesive arachnoiditis to particular service circumstances. This legislative instrument aims to facilitate the assessment and determination of claims by specifying the factors that must exist to establish a reasonable hypothesis connecting the condition with the service rendered. It also serves to replace the previous Statement of Principles No. 116 of 2011 and reflects the latest developments in medical-scientific evidence concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis.

Scope and Application

The Statement of Principles concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 74 of 2020) applies to individuals who have served in various capacities under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). This includes those who have rendered operational, peacekeeping, hazardous, or British nuclear test defence service under the VEA, as well as those who have participated in warlike or non-warlike service under the MRCA. The Act aims to facilitate claims for medical treatment and compensation for veterans and Defence Force members suffering from spinal adhesive arachnoiditis by establishing the minimum circumstances that must exist to connect the condition with their service. The principles are designed to assist the Repatriation Commission and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission in assessing claims, and to support the review of such decisions by the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The Instrument replaces the previous Statement of Principles No. 116 of 2011, reflecting updated medical-scientific evidence. The Instrument's scope extends to the entire Commonwealth of Australia and is compatible with human rights, promoting rights such as social security, an adequate standard of living, and the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health without discrimination.

Key Provisions

The Statement of Principles concerning spinal adhesive arachnoiditis (Reasonable Hypothesis) (No. 74 of 2020) sets out the circumstances under which spinal adhesive arachnoiditis, or death from this condition, can be considered to be related to specific kinds of service rendered by a person (section 5). These circumstances are determined based on sound medical-scientific evidence and apply to operational service, peacekeeping service, hazardous service, British nuclear test defence service, warlike service, and non-warlike service under the relevant Acts (Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004). The Statement of Principles details the specific factors that must exist, such as severe spinal trauma, spinal surgery, and other medical treatments, and specifies how these factors must be related to the service for a reasonable hypothesis to be raised (subsection 9). The obligations imposed by the Statement of Principles include the necessity for claimants to provide evidence that meets the criteria outlined in the Statement when making a claim for benefits related to spinal adhesive arachnoiditis. The Repatriation Commission and the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission are required to assess these claims based on the criteria specified in the Statement, ensuring that the claims are evaluated in a fair and scientifically sound manner. The Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal must also consider these criteria when reviewing decisions made by the Commissions. Failure to comply with the requirements of the Statement of Principles can result in the denial of claims for benefits related to spinal adhesive arachnoiditis. There are no explicit offences or penalties mentioned in the Statement of Principles itself. However, any breach of the provisions of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 or the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 could potentially lead to civil or administrative penalties, including the repayment of any benefits received in error. The precise consequences would depend on the specific provisions of these Acts and the nature of the breach.

Legal classification tags

Area of Law
Veterans' Law
Instrument
Act
Concepts
Definitions & Interpretation
Reporting & Disclosure Obligations
Regulatory Standards

Interactions

Authorises

All Versions

Sourced from the Federal Register of Legislation at 26 August 2026. For the latest information on Australian Government law please go to https://www.legislation.gov.au.