that case i'm release you from treatment you can go back to work but he also said i'm going to remain available to you if you want to come back to see me you come back at any time he said you can call back and come back in any time  some more diagnostic studies and then come back and once i get the results of those studies we'll assess where we go from there that's what the obvious twenty twenty did in what sense so i think it's a quantum leap to say he effectively acceptance used to continue treating with my employer's doctor or you treats him for a long time and then finally says i find that you are well and effect is that and then you don't like that so you don't want to work anymore so you find another doctor another doctor says i can't help you any further he's refused to treat it so he goes to another doctor and finally finds a doctor who would say that you can never go back to work again i mean at some point one of you sign a statement that you'd know about your rights and you are choosing this doctor and that doctor comes to a conclusion a professionally accepted conclusion that you are able to go to work that has to be accepted on its face seems to me otherwise you just go on and on and on and anytime you don't like a doctor's opinion you say well he's refusing treatment because he and different circumstances and perhaps you can distinguish those cases that when a doctor refuses or where a doctor says you can reach maximum recovery that is a refusal to treat him further we've that patient for the medical treatment if he signs a form sam i'm willing to accept your doctor a doctor gives treats him and then finds according his own opinion that the man is ready to go back to work which is not can't be challenged if it's within an acceptable medical opinion i mean doctors who disagree on everything just like lawyers but in this case they claim it will got to be mandatory but he wanted to change his  compton a doctor who renders a competent medical excepted opinion is your obligation to pay for that doctor's on that particular that particular entry terminated we were going to ziggy keep going and going and going going going and no medical question there was no medical dispute which gave rise to the economy it was premature and best for all i mean he was and you could change for fit as i understand section seven see all other cases the consent which is necessary which is necessary is in the consent in this case came after you went to the doctor the second doctor right and  how how far are we going to let this go so if if you take it to its conclusion once dr bostwick said you can go back to work which he is going to be in time of to say that's i don't agree with that either pick another doctor for because i just don't think of it that's how steiner had evaluated mr scott and found dr steiner found that on seven twenty mr scott had no lower back pain he had a normal range of motion normal gait and he had no need for further treatment two days later mr scott sees dr johnson dr john would have been required to pay part really not the second the second if he if he had declined the mario's doctor the employer would have to pay for the doctor that he chose i suppose would you know not necessarily the importing telling me that the practices that if he doesn't sign that sent for long have a stock company doctor look at him then and then the employer at that point automatically shuts off any further compensation did ask for another m r i but again our position is that even when he got that m r i can still didn't have any additional treatment for mr scott the district director who knows dr steiner in the news his reputation in the community as being a doctor and how these i'm i'm sure they made a concession i'm not arguing about that but i mean just as a matter of semantics if nothing else when you decide all the same it is just good enough to go well forget that i'm just going to go through another process and get this done he was told i'm not going to get a treatment but legally the implore you would in the law are required a medical question raised in the case which is whether spinal surgery is required or these are not opposing doctors there are those inside it's just a medical question and that's all