By William P. Morrow, Morrow Law Firm, Opelousas, Louisiana
When someone is injured due to negligence, the financial impact often goes beyond medical bills and lost wages. One of the more complex components of an injury claim is “pain and suffering.” This term refers to the non-economic damage caused by an injury—the physical discomfort, emotional distress, and disruption to everyday life that cannot be measured with receipts or spreadsheets.
Unlike economic damages, which are supported by concrete documentation, pain and suffering is a subjective element of compensation. It requires careful explanation, evidence, and in some cases, expert testimony to justify its value.
Pain and suffering typically includes both physical and emotional consequences of an injury. Physical pain can range from mild discomfort to chronic, long-term agony. Emotional suffering includes anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances, post-traumatic stress, and the loss of enjoyment in daily life. When someone can no longer participate in hobbies, interact with family the same way, or live without fear of recurring symptoms, those losses fall under this category.
Calculating pain and suffering is not a fixed science. Courts rely on past rewards, or jurisprudence.
To support a claim for pain and suffering, thorough documentation is essential. Medical records are foundational, but they must be supported by other forms of evidence. Photos of injuries, records of medication taken for pain, notes from therapists or counselors, and statements from family members or co-workers can all be used to demonstrate how the injury has affected daily life. Journals kept by the injured party describing their condition and emotional state over time can also strengthen the claim.
The legal process requires more than just listing symptoms. A compelling pain and suffering claim must establish how the injury has changed life in tangible ways. This includes inability to work, reduced independence, limited physical activity, and relationship strain. When these changes are documented and presented consistently, they can have a significant impact on the outcome of a case.
In cases involving workplace injuries, the scope of pain and suffering damages may depend on the circumstances surrounding the claim. Standard workers’ compensation laws do not always allow for pain and suffering compensation unless the claim involves a third-party liability component. However, when negligence outside of the employer-employee relationship is involved, the injured worker may have the ability to pursue additional damages, including those for pain and suffering.
Juries are often responsible for determining the final value of pain and suffering if a case goes to trial. Their decisions are influenced by the credibility of the evidence, the clarity of the injury’s impact, and the way the injured person presents the changes in their quality of life. Judges may adjust these awards if they fall outside what is considered reasonable, but the jury’s role is central in assigning value to non-economic losses.
Insurance companies frequently attempt to minimize pain and suffering claims by challenging the severity or duration of symptoms. Delays in treatment, gaps in medical records, or inconsistent testimony can all be used to question the validity of the claim. That’s why continuity in treatment, consistent reporting, and clear communication about the injury’s impact are essential from the outset.
Pain and suffering damages reflect the real human cost of injury. While they do not come with a receipt or invoice, they are no less important than the tangible losses covered by economic damages. These claims acknowledge that recovery is about more than just physical healing—it’s about rebuilding the quality of life that was disrupted.
Establishing the value of pain and suffering involves preparation, documentation, and a clear understanding of how the injury has affected every part of a person’s life. For those navigating an injury claim, knowing how this component is calculated can lead to better decision-making and more realistic expectations about the recovery process—both legally and personally.