FENDER UNBENT

An elderly woman wearing a well-adjusted seatbelt suffered fatal chest injury in a minor collision, whereas the unrestrained driver and passenger in the other car were uninjured[1].

What evidence is there to support the defence argument that causation of post-traumatic symptoms can be disproved by vehicle engineering evidence? If vehicle damage is minimal, can there be significant personal injury?

It is self-evident that discrepancy between passenger and vehicle damage during low-impact rear end collision will be greatest on sheet ice at one extreme, and if the vehicle is immediately behind a heavy immoveable object at the other.

As reported in Medical Litigation News Volume 1, Issue 6, orthopedic surgeon Dr Murray Allen's creatively compared the forces in whiplash injuries to those of such "perturbations of daily living" as flopping in a chair[2]. The British Columbia courts in particular have seen the methodology and conclusions of his research repeatedly challenged, often decisively.

Though there are too many unknown variables to determine a relationship between engineering data and clinical assessments in any individual accident, multifactorial analysis of very large numbers could eventually put this contentious issue on a sounder scientific basis. An Injury Impairment Scale and an Injury Disability Scale, which also takes into account the patient's ability to accommodate impairment, have been developed[3] and are in process of being tested for utility and validity[4]. The Scales have yet to be applied to motor vehicle damage and bodily injury.

Copyright © 2008 Electronic Handbook of Legal Medicine