Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:28:29.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Compensation Psychosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

A. C. White*
Affiliation:
Queen Elizabeth Hospital. Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 21H; University of Birmingham
D. Armstrong
Affiliation:
Highcroft Hospital, Birmingham; Hollymoor Hospital, Birmingham
D. Rowan
Affiliation:
Midland Nerve Hospital, Birmingham
*
Correspondence

Extract

Kennedy (1946) stated that “A compensation neurosis is a state of mind, born out of fear, kept alive by avarice, stimulated by lawyersand curedby a verdict”. This theme, supported by Miller's influential paper in 1961, has ensured that genera tions of patients havebeenregardedwith suspicion if they daredto presentwith psychologicalsymptoms following an accident. The view remained un challenged for over a decade and is still often presentedto, and acceptedby, our Courts, despite the fact that Miller reached his conclusions after examiningpatientwsho presentefdorlegarleports in whose casesit was not surprising that he found a relationship betweencompensation and psycho logical sequelae The psychological effects of proceeding litigation on the victim of an accident remain a matter of current debate. McKinley et al (1983), reported differences betweenthose patients suffering a severeblunt headinjury claimingcompen sation and those not claiming compensation. The reports givenby relativesof changesin both patients werevery similar. However, reports given by patients themselves differed with claimants reporting slightly more symptoms than non-claimants. In a study by Whitein 1981, the author followed up 163 victims of accidents admitted to the Birmingham Accident Hospital (76 burns and 87 general accidents). One year after their accident, psychological sequelaewere found in approximately two-thirds of the group, one third being moderately-to-severely psychologically affected. There was no statistical difference between those victims in whom the accident had given rise to litigation and in whom the case was still proceeding and those victims where compensation was not an issue.

Type
Brief Reports
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 The Royal College of Psychiatrists 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brooks, D. N. & McKinlay, W. W. (1983) Personality and behaviour change after severe blunt head injury. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 46, 336344.Google Scholar
Kelly, R. & Smith, B. N. (1981) Post traumatic syndromes; another myth discredited. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 74, 275277.Google Scholar
Kennedy, I. (1946) The mind of the injured worker, its effect on disability periods. Compensation Medicine, 1, 1924.Google Scholar
McKinlay, W., Brooks, D. N. & Bond, M. R. (1983) Post-concussional symptoms, financial compensation and outcome of severe blunt head injury. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 46, 10841091.Google Scholar
Merksey, M. & Woodforde, J. M. (1972) Psychiatric sequelae of minor head injury. Brain, 95, 521528.Google Scholar
Miller, H. (1961) Accident neurosis. British Medical Journal, 1, 919925.Google Scholar
Wexler, B. E. (1986) A model of brain function and its implication for psychiatric research. British Journal of Psychiatry, 148, 357362.Google Scholar
White, A. (1981) Psychiatric study of patients with severe burn injuries. British Medical Journal, 284, 465467.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.