3. There was a dissent in this case [not included hereJ.Judge Breitei noted that the evidence was that Mrs. Wolfe had a psychological condition such that her trauma \"could never have occurred unless she, to begin with, was extraordinarily vulnerable to severe shock at or away from her place of employment or one produced by accident or injury to those close to her in employment or in her private life.\" The judge worried that \"one can easily call up a myriad of commonplace occupational pursuits where employees are often exposed to the nusfortunes of others which may in the mentally unstable evoke precisely the symptoms which this claimant suffered." He concluded, \"In an era marked by examples of overburdening of socially desirable programs with resultant curtailment or destruction of such programs, a realistic assessment of impact of doctrine is imperative. An overburdening of the compensation system by injudicious and openended expansion of compensation benets, especially for costly, prolonged, and often only ameliorative psychiatric care, cannot but threaten its soundness or that of the enterprises upon which it depends.\" What is the concern here