One of the first things I hear from a lot of injured workers is some version of: I already had a bad back / bad knee / old shoulder injury, so I probably can't file a claim, right? It's one of the most common reasons people talk themselves out of reporting a legitimate work injury — and it's usually wrong. A pre-existing condition doesn't automatically disqualify you from workers' comp. What matters is whether your job made it worse.
The difference between having a condition and aggravating one
Plenty of people work for years with a degenerative disc, an old sports injury, or arthritis that's manageable — until a specific work incident, or repetitive work over time, makes it meaningfully worse. When that happens, the aggravation itself is generally treated as a new, compensable injury, separate from whatever came before it. You're not required to have had a "clean" body before the injury happened. Almost nobody does.
Why insurance companies lean on this argument anyway
"Pre-existing condition" is one of the most reliable tools an insurance company has for denying or shrinking a claim, because it's partly true — you did have something going on before. The trick they rely on is blurring the line between having a condition and the work injury making it worse. I wrote last week about independent medical exams, and this is exactly the kind of finding that shows up in an insurance-selected doctor's report: "degenerative," "unrelated to the workplace incident," "consistent with normal aging." Sometimes that's an honest medical opinion. Often it's the easiest way to close a file.
What actually supports a claim like this
- Medical records from before the injury, if they exist, showing what your condition was actually like — not what an insurer assumes it was like.
- A clear description of what changed. Could you do your job the day before the incident and not the day after? That functional change matters more than an X-ray showing "pre-existing degeneration," which most adults over 40 have somewhere in their spine or joints regardless of symptoms.
- Your treating doctor's opinion on causation — specifically, whether the work incident aggravated, accelerated, or worsened the underlying condition, not just whether the condition existed before.
- Consistency in how you reported it. Telling your doctor and your employer the same story about what happened and when strengthens the connection between the incident and the change in your condition.
Don't let this argument talk you out of reporting an injury
I've had clients who almost didn't file a claim at all because they assumed an old injury made them ineligible. That assumption costs people real benefits — medical treatment, wage replacement, and sometimes permanent disability compensation they were entitled to the whole time. If you're not sure whether your situation qualifies, that's a question worth asking before you decide not to report anything.
Frequently asked questions
- What is the difference between having a condition and aggravating one?
- Plenty of people work for years with a degenerative disc, an old sports injury, or arthritis that's manageable — until a specific work incident, or repetitive work over time, makes it meaningfully worse. When that happens, the aggravation itself is generally treated as a new, compensable injury, separate from whatever came before it.
- Why do insurers lean on the pre-existing condition argument?
- "Pre-existing condition" is one of the most reliable tools an insurance company has for denying or shrinking a claim, because it's partly true — you did have something going on before. The trick they rely on is blurring the line between having a condition and the work injury making it worse.
- What supports a claim involving a pre-existing condition?
- Medical records from before the injury, if they exist, showing what your condition was actually like — not what an insurer assumes it was like. A clear description of what changed. Could you do your job the day before the incident and not the day after?
I've Pushed Back on This Argument for Years
Insurance companies use "pre-existing condition" because it works on people who don't know better. I know exactly how these arguments get built and how to take them apart — with medical records, causation opinions, and a client's own account of what changed. That approach has helped produce more than $23 million recovered for injured Nebraskans and countless five-star client reviews and peer endorsements, from a firm voted Best of Omaha for personal injury law in 2025 and 2026.
Call (402) 378-9208
Your Attorney
Frank Younes
Every page on this site is written by Frank Younes, a Nebraska trial attorney with a published record of verdicts and settlements, selection to the National Trial Lawyers Top 100, and a practice that covers every county in Nebraska and Iowa. No case is handed to an associate — the lawyer you read here is the lawyer who works your case.
More about Frank → · Free consultation: (402) 378-9208