In 2006, Carl Koch sued his employer for damages after burn injuries during a workplace accident that left him with chronic pain. The employer accused him of malingering, so the judge admitted a neuroscientist as an expert witness, who testified that he could see Koch’s pain on a brain scan. The case was settled for more than ten times the amount the employer initially offered.
This case is not unusual, as chronic pain can be severely debilitating. It can make it impossible to work, exercise and have a social life. It can make you depressed and anxious.
Having pain recognised by insurers, employers and government agencies can mean the difference between receiving benefits and being left without support. So it’s understandable that a judge wants to see objective evidence, such as a brain scan, showing chronic pain.
The problem is that it doesn’t work. However, as Koch’s case shows, it is used anyway. Good for Mr Koch, in this case, but what if the neuroscientist had told the judge that he is faking his pain?
Who is believed?
