Whether due to a chronic condition, an active injury that's in the process of treatment or healing, or some other factor, it's not uncommon for someone to be in less than optimal health before an accident even takes place. So, what happens when an accident aggravates an existing injury or condition? The simple answer is that it can complicate things, but it should not prevent recovery of fair compensation in your personal injury case.
While the possibilities are almost limitless, some of the most common pre-existing injuries include:
It's important to note that accidents don't always make pre-existing injuries worse. They can also exacerbate pre-existing medical conditions. Or, to put it another way, a pre-existing medical condition can enhance the effects of the accident. Some examples are:
When you decide to make a personal injury claim after an accident, it's a well-established rule that any money you receive ("damages") will not include compensation for injuries or conditions that existed before the accident. However, if the at-fault party's negligence or other wrongful conduct made your pre-existing condition worse, then the at-fault party can be held financially liable for those effects. This rule may sound simple, but given the complexity of the human body and the difficulty inherent in proving causation in certain cases, the existence of a pre-existing injury or condition can make it more difficult to determine liability and calculate damages.
Showing that an accident caused a specific injury is typically the most challenging aspect of cases involving pre-existing injuries. For example, if you have no back pain and no history of back injury before a car accident that results in severe back complications, it's pretty clear that the accident was the cause.
But if you have lower back pain due to a slipped disc from your prior job as a construction worker, and you later get into a car accident, obtaining recovery could be more difficult. Now, the at-fault driver or the car insurance company can argue that the back pain you're feeling now is caused by your pre-existing back injury.
You can theoretically try to show that your pre-existing back injury was of a certain type and severity before the accident, and that now it's different in terms of nature and/or intensity. For instance, you can emphasize that your occasional back pain "flare-ups" were easily managed with over-the-counter pain relievers before the accident. But now, you need prescription painkillers and weekly visits to the chiropractor just to be able to get out of bed each morning. But there is a large degree of subjectivity here, and an insurance adjuster or the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit will almost certainly argue that you're exaggerating the effects of the latest accident and/or understating the impact of the older one.
Even if you can prove the accident made your pre-existing injury worse, it can be a challenge to establish the precise amount of damages you should receive. Using the above example, your damages might be the cost of prescription medication plus chiropractor medical costs. There might be some additional damages too, such as lost income from missed work, which is easily calculated. The difficulty comes when trying to determine your more subjective and intangible damages, such as "pain and suffering." It's hard enough to calculate these losses when there is no pre-existing injury. But when the earlier injury is aggravated by the accident, the task becomes even more challenging. And whatever calculations you come up with, you can be confident the person responsible for your injuries will believe your final figure is excessive. Get tips on negotiating a personal injury settlement.
Imagine you have severe osteoporosis. Then one day while grocery shopping, you slip and fall in a puddle of water in one of the aisles. The fall was minor, but due to your osteoporosis, you break your hip. You must go through multiple surgeries and months of physical therapy. If the store is liable for your fall, should they have to pay for all of your injuries? The answer is almost always "yes", because of the "eggshell plaintiff" rule. This rule says that a liable party is responsible for all of the injuries the plaintiff receives, regardless of the plaintiff's condition before the accident. In other words, the defendant must fully compensate a plaintiff for all injuries, even if a pre-existing condition makes the plaintiff more susceptible to an injury or makes any injury much worse, and even if the defendant could not have reasonably foreseen the severity or extent of the resulting injuries. (Learn more about intervening causes and foreseeability.)
Despite the extra complications that can arise, a pre-existing injury can sometimes make getting compensation easier, in the sense that a clear picture of the plaintiff's condition before the accident can make it easier to identify and measure the impact of the harm caused by the accident.
Looking back at the prior construction worker example of lower back pain and the car accident, let's add the fact that the claimant is 60 years old. Following the accident, one of the defendant's arguments is that because of the claimant's age and the natural degeneration of the discs in his spine, the herniated disc likely existed before the accident. But luckily, because of the claimant's work injury and ongoing treatment, MRI images show the condition of his back just a few weeks before the car accident, and there is no indication of herniation. Now, it's far easier to counter the defendant's arguments thanks to these pre-accident medical records.
While a pre-existing injury probably won't doom your personal injury claim, it can complicate things considerably. For information that's tailored to your situation, talk to a personal injury lawyer.