Any personal injury solicitors? Query re: Damages

[ilovemydogandMrObama]

I was in a car crash last October. Other side has admitted liability.

Saw independent medical examiner (debatable the independent part) this morning. Told him I wasn't able to b/f after accident and he said it was only relevant if I intended to have more children

I said that it wasn't my decision to stop b/fing, as the decision was taken away from me.

Surely damages would be calculated based on this child?

He should include it in the report as it will be relevant to your damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity (PSLA also known as general damages). I am not sure how they would assess the damages and have just had a quick look at the case law and there is certainly no separate head of claim. However, it is not for the medical expert to decide if it is relevant or not. Make sure it is included in his report and your solicitor pursues it as part of your general damages.

The level of damages you get for the "pain & suffering" element of your claim (solatium in Scotland, not sure what you would call it in England) should be enhanced by the fact that you were unable to bf. It is definitely something that your solcitor should point out when they value your claim.

If it caused you and mental anguish that resulted in your seeing your GP then you might be able to claim psychiatric damage.

(btw I am sure it did cause you mental anguish - but to make it a stand alone head of claim you would need to have sought medical advice)

I wouldn't listen to the medical examiner - he dosen't know how cases are valued.

If you were my client I would be specifying that you had to stop bf as a result of the accident which caused you distress and argue for a higher level of damages on that basis.

HTH - I am basing this on how we do things in Scotland woso it may be a bit different if you are in England.

if it has led to you being directly out of pocket because you have had to buy formula for a child who would otherwise have been bf, then your solicitor should include this sum in the 'special damages schedule' as well.

This is separate from and additional to any extra distress that the accident caused you, by having this effect on your ability to bf.

But it is true what meep says - there is a difference between a free-standing psychological or psychiatric injury, which is a claim basis in itself, and an effect on you from the accident which does not amount to a separate kind of injury.

For example many people experience some bad dreams, disturbed sleep, after an accident, and this would typically be taken into account in the level of compensation awarded for the basic physical injuries. But someone who suffered full blown Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of the accident would be treated as having another injury in addition to the cuts, bruises etc.

Thank you both so much!

Most bizarre medical examination as he kept putting injuries into a legal context and saying that the 'other side will dispute that' and 'not sure that's direct causation'

I did ask him though to record the fact that I had seen my GP after the accident and hadn't been able to breastfeed as a direct result.

Glad that damages won't be assessed for future children!

Very very odd man -- and of course he had to add that there wasn't any medical evidence that it was beneficial after 8 months anyway. Honestly, where do they find these people!

hadn't thought of the cost of formula angle - at over £7 a tin it is worth calculating how much you have spent/will spend. However I am sure the other side will argue about how long you would have bf for, so be ready for it!

yes, very odd for him to give opinions like that in a medical exam.

did your solicitor agree that you would see him? Any 'joint sole expert' is supposed to be scrupulously impartial. I would mention it to your solicitor (or legal dept of insurers, whoever is handling claim for you).

also be aware that you are entitled to see whatever he writes in a report, and if it is not purely his medical opinion, your solicitor should deal with it - by follow up questions or asking the judge to cross those bits out (if its gets as far as court).

Yes, it was an agreed expert. I did mention the exam to them this morning, and without wishing to be rude to paralegals, she didn't see the problem; that future losses re: inability to breastfeed would only be relevant as far as future children. I tried to explain it wasn't comparable to a neck injury, but think I wasted by breath.

So, I am going to wait for the report.

Thanks again for all the useful advice. Makes me feel like I'm not losing my marbles