Wondering whether it's your kamma

Asked whether everything a person feels comes from past deeds, the Buddha said no: some feelings come from bile, phlegm or wind, from changes of season, from careless living or from strain, and the claim that all of it is past deeds overreaches both firsthand experience and what is commonly accepted as true. He listed exactly how the results of deeds ripen among four things not to think about, and he defined kamma itself as intention — what one chooses to do. So the suttas give no support to anyone who tells you that your illness or loss is deserved. They do say deeds bear fruit, and the lump-of-salt simile says the same trivial deed lands differently in a small mind and a big-hearted one; that is about what you do from here, not a verdict on what has happened to you. If a diagnosis is involved, it belongs with your doctors.

What the suttas say

It is intention that I call deeds. For after making a choice one acts by way of body, speech, and mind.
Kamma defined in one line — deeds are intentions, acted on in body, speech, and mind.
Where this stops: The same discourse says deeds bear results in this life, the next, or later; the definition does not make results disappear. Never use it to explain someone's illness, loss, poverty or abuse as their kamma.
AN 6.63:33.3–33.5 · Penetrative
‘Everything this individual person experiences—pleasurable, painful, or neutral—is because of past deeds.’ What does the worthy Gotama say about this? “Sīvaka, some feelings stem from bile disorders. You can know this from your own personal experience, and it is generally deemed to be true. Since this is so, the ascetics and brahmins whose view is that everything an individual person experiences is because of past deeds go beyond personal experience and beyond what is generally deemed to be true. So those ascetics and brahmins are wrong, I say. Some feelings stem from phlegm disorders … wind disorders … their conjunction … change in weather … not taking care of yourself … exertion … Some feelings are the result of past deeds. You can know this from your own personal experience, and it is generally deemed to be true. Since this is so, the ascetics and brahmins whose view is that everything an individual person experiences is because of past deeds go beyond personal experience and beyond what is generally deemed to be true. So those ascetics and brahmins are wrong, I say.”
Asked whether everything a person feels is due to past deeds, the Buddha says no — some feeling has bodily causes, and the claim overreaches both firsthand experience and what people commonly accept. The same range names phlegm, wind, the seasons, careless living, strain, and the result of past deeds.
Where this stops: Past deeds are one cause among the eight it lists, so it does not say kamma plays no part; its physiology of bile, phlegm, and wind is ancient.
SN 36.21:1.5–3.15 · With Sīvaka
“Mendicants, these four things are unthinkable. They should not be thought about, and anyone who tries to think about them will go mad or get frustrated. What four? The domain of the Buddhas … The domain of one in absorption … The results of deeds … Speculation about the world … These are the four unthinkable things. They should not be thought about, and anyone who tries to think about them will go mad or get frustrated.”
The precise working of results is one of four things the Buddha says not to think about — an answer to anyone trying to trace a misfortune back to its cause.
Where this stops: It is not a ban on thinking about ethics; what is set aside is speculation about exactly how results ripen. Never use it to explain someone's illness, loss, poverty or abuse as their kamma.
AN 4.77:1.1–1.11 · Unthinkable
Suppose a person was to drop a lump of salt into a mug of water. What do you think, mendicants? Would that mug of water become salty and undrinkable? “Yes, sir. Why is that? Because there is only a little water in the bowl.” “Suppose a person was to drop a lump of salt into the Ganges River. What do you think, mendicants? Would the Ganges River become salty and undrinkable?” “No, sir. Why is that? Because the Ganges River is a vast mass of water.” This is how it is in the case of an individual who does a trivial bad deed, but it lands them in hell. Meanwhile, another individual does the same trivial bad deed, but experiences it in this life, so that not even a little remains, let alone a lot. …
The lump of salt — one small wrong lands very differently depending on who did it; results are not a fixed tariff.
Where this stops: The sutta frames the difference in terms of hell and this life, and the person like the vast river is one developed in ethics, mind, and wisdom; it is not a promise that a good person's mistakes cost others nothing. Never use it to explain someone's illness, loss, poverty or abuse as their kamma.
AN 3.100:4.1–5.2 · A Lump of Salt
For this body is ailing, swaddled in its shell. If anyone dragging around this body claimed to be healthy even for an hour, what is that but foolishness? So you should train like this: ‘Though my body is ailing, my mind will be healthy.’ That’s how you should train.
Nakulapitā, old and ill — the training the Buddha gives him.
SN 22.1:3.2–3.6 · Nakula’s Father

Bring your own situation.