Whither Suffering? The Potential Impact of Tort Reform on the Emotional and Existential Healing of Traumatically Injured Chronic Pain Patients

Abstract

Approximately half of the state legislatures in the USA have enacted tort reform, generally focused on reducing noneconomic damages such as those awarded for pain and suffering of traumatically injured parties. Traumatic injury has been empirically associated with the development of chronic pain, which in turn has been associated with the concept of human suffering. This analysis examines the meaning of suffering within the context of traumatically induced chronic pain, recognizing that this population is at heightened risk of experiencing long-term emotional as well as physical pain. Factors contributing to profound suffering include the potential development of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety, role/identity loss, maltreatment by a medical system generally inept in its management of chronic pain, and the negative manner in which personal injury victims are often treated by the legal system. While the American medical system struggles to identify suffering, the legal system-through tort reform-has chosen to simply ignore it, demonstrating little concern for the integrity of the vulnerable chronic pain sufferer. In doing so, the "destructed" chronic painient is further "deconstructed". We argue that by limiting the size of settlements and jury awards, tort reform serves to potentially deny personal injury victims of a critical vehicle for finding meaning in their suffering, and accordingly limits their likelihood of achieving relief.

Trends in Psychological/Psychiatric Injury and Law: Continuing Education, Practice Comments, Recommendations

“…For example, recent decisions involving admissibility vary in terms of whether professional experience is an admissible basis of testimony as an expert (Faust et al 2010). Also, the tort reform that is taking place across states is capping compensation for "pain and suffering" (Schatman and Sullivan 2010). Professionals in the field, whether mental health professionals or attorneys, need to keep abreast of these developments in order work to determine the impact of the changes and work effectively in the field.…”

“…Therapeutically for chronic pain patients, an integrated multidisciplinary approach that includes psychological treatment has been found to be cost-effective. Schatman and Sullivan (2010) reviewed the literature on affective comorbidities and pain. For example, Beck and Coffey (2007) underscored the importance of chronic pain and PTSD.…”

“…As for legal-related issues, Schatman and Sullivan (2010) pointed out that about half of US state legislatures have enacted tort reform that aims to reduce noneconomic damages, such as for "pain and suffering." They concluded that this affects the capacity of pain patients to reconstruct meaning in their lives so that the tort reforms are "ethically suspect."…”

Erratum to: Trends in Psychological/Psychiatric Injury and Law: Continuing Education, Practice Comments, Recommendations

“…For example, recent decisions involving admissibility vary in terms of whether professional experience is an admissible basis of testimony as an expert (Faust et al 2010). Also, the tort reform that is taking place across states is capping compensation for "pain and suffering" (Schatman and Sullivan 2010). Professionals in the field, whether mental health professionals or attorneys, need to keep abreast of these developments in order to determine the impact of the changes and work effectively in the field.…”

The Relationship Between Industry and Pain Societies, Part 1: Demystification and Legitimization of Continuing Medical Education

“…This Ethics Forum, however, will examine potential conflicts of interest between industry and pain societies, as organizations can experience such conflicts as well . While conflicts of interest potentially threaten scientific integrity and quality of patient care in all areas of medicine, such conflict of interest is particularly deleterious in pain medicine, given the vulnerability not only of patients with pain but of the physicians who treat pain, as well .…”