A relative of mine was hurt on the job and is seeking workman's comp. Due to the extent of his injury, he needed to stay with someone while awaiting treatment, and has been staying with us. Unfortunately, this arrangement is not working out. We are desperate to help him relocate to stay with another family member, but he claims he must stay in state in order to receive medical treatment through his company's worker's comp. The company he works for is national, operating in all 50 states. I know nothing about this kind of law, but this seems off to me. Our relative is severely injured, on pain medication, and has little knowledge about law, so part of me suspects that he is misunderstanding and I wanted to investigate further on his behalf. I know for a fact that he has to see his company's doctors for the first 30 days of treatment (we are currently on day 19) and then after that he can see the doctor's he chooses. My question is: after these 30 days are up, can my relative's employer legally force him to seek treatment in state? Ideally we would like to relocate him from our place in California (where he was injured) to his mother's place in Florida, where she will be able to provide him with more sufficient care, day in, day out. I have never been in a situation like this one before, so I truly don't know if his claims are accurate, or simply a misunderstanding.