A troubling practice in the insurance industry has come to light, where doctors criticized for providing biased or substandard court testimony are being hired by insurance companies to dispute injury claims. This practice is raising serious concerns among accident victims and advocacy groups about the fairness of compensation cases and the credibility of expert witnesses.
A Case of Controversial Testimony
Jonathan Graul, a resident of Fergus, Ontario, experienced this firsthand after suffering a traumatic brain injury in a head-on collision in December 2017. Unable to work and facing financial strain, Graul sued the other driver and their insurer, Aviva, for compensation.
In court, Graul found himself facing harsh testimony from two medical experts hired by Aviva. Despite having medical evidence from over a dozen health professionals supporting his claims, one expert, Dr. Lawrence Freedman, asserted that Graul’s traumatic brain injury didn’t exist. Another expert, Dr. Sara Mitchell, testified that his injury had resolved.
“It was dirty,” Graul said, describing the ordeal as a personal attack. “I’m still angry. I just don’t see why that happens.”
Concerns Over Expert Witness Credibility
Medical experts are expected to provide objective, unbiased evidence in court. However, there are growing concerns about the reliability of testimony from some hired by insurers. Accident victim advocate Rhona DesRoches, chair of the FAIR Association of Victims for Accident Insurance Reform, highlights the lack of accountability for medical experts who deliver questionable testimony.
“Everything hinges on these medical reports,” DesRoches said. “The quality of the medical evidence used in courts is a big concern. They make a lot of money doing this, and they really ought to be sure about what they’re saying.”
Despite being flagged for providing unreliable or biased opinions, these experts often face no consequences and can continue testifying in future cases.
The Impact on Victims
For accident victims like Graul, the consequences of questionable expert testimony are devastating. After the collision, Graul suffered from headaches, memory issues, ringing in his ears, and vision problems. Despite these challenges and the support of multiple health professionals, he felt the expert testimony undermined his case.
“My wife described me as a shell,” Graul said, recalling the toll the injury and legal battle took on his life. “To this day, my ears are ringing incessantly, and it’s 24-7.”
Advocacy for Change
Advocates are calling for increased scrutiny of medical experts in court cases, arguing that the credibility and quality of their testimony should be carefully monitored. Greater transparency and accountability are essential to ensure that accident victims receive fair treatment in compensation claims.
Source : Swifteradio.com
