Best ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD Lawyers
Our ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD lawyers just reviewed a recent nearly $1,3 million dollar combined pecuniary and non pecuniary award largely related to hip and back injuries and ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD. Don’t ever let an ICBC adjustor or defence lawyer tell you your pain “is all in your head” as if to say you are malingering or faking. Our experieinced ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD lawyers will meet with you for free to develop a plan to treat your injuries and to obtain justice for you with a strategy to obtain the highest ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD settlement for you. Meet Spencer MacLean now for free to get the healing process started. Call toll free across BC at 1-877-602-9900 to meet with Spencer MacLean or any of the other lawyers on our team.
ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD Occurs in Over 10% of Cases
Our skilled ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD lawyers know that ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD cases can occur in roughly 10 percent or more of all ICBC car accident injury cases.
The BC Medical Jounal describes Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as follows:
Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a mental health condition that occurs in at least 10% of motor vehicle collision survivors who have sustained a physical injury. While having many determinants, PTSD is causally intertwined with chronic pain and physical illness. PTSD patients have objectively worse physical health, worse subjective impressions of their physical health, and use more general medical interventions than do their age and gender peers. PTSD exacerbates such common pain conditions as post-traumatic headache, a common consequence of whiplash. The causal relationship between PTSD and pain extends in the opposite direction as well. The presence of chronic pain several months after a motor vehicle collision predicts the presence of PTSD. The severity of the pain experience at the beginning of psychological treatment for PTSD also limits the effectiveness of such treatment. The causal role of chronic pain in the exacerbation of PTSD can be understood as being a reminder of the original trauma and, if one views chronic pain as representing resource loss (i.e., loss of physical well-being), such continuing pain will maintain PTSD symptoms long after the initial injury.
What are the symptoms for an ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD case?
- Reliving the event (also called re-experiencing symptoms)
- Avoiding situations that remind you of the event.
- Negative changes in beliefs and feelings.
- Feeling keyed up (also called hyperarousal)
Recent Example Of Damages For ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD
In the ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD case of Pike v. Kasiri, 2016 BCSC 555 the court went through the before and after condition of a healthy and active man who suffered serious physical and mental injuries including debilitating ICBC Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD.
 Jeffrey David Pike (“the Plaintiff”) is about to turn 40 years old. Almost six-and-a-half years ago, on August 18, 2009, at about 7:00 p.m., the Plaintiff’s vehicle was struck on the right side as it entered an intersection by a vehicle driven by Ashkan Kasiri (“the Defendant”), who had proceeded through a red light. Liability for the accident is admitted.  Prior to the motor vehicle accident, the Plaintiff was a strong and healthy person, who worked as a plumber and played baseball at a high level. Personality wise, he was a well-adjusted, outgoing and sociable man in a happy marriage.  After the accident, the Plaintiff experienced pain and stiffness in his neck and back, particularly on the lower right side, as well as pain in his knees, mainly his left knee. He claims to have experienced a sharp pain in his left groin that gradually developed into a very serious problem in his left hip, which has required two surgeries and is still symptomatic. He became a much diminished individual insofar as he could no longer work as a plumber or play baseball. As at the time of trial, five and a half years post-accident, simple physical movements and chores still caused him considerable pain and discomfort. His relationships have suffered and his personality has changed in negative ways. He has also suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms, depression and chronic pain, for which he continues to require medication and counselling.
 With regard to the psychological/psychiatric injuries sustained by the plaintiff, the principles to be applied in assessing such claims are summarized by Mr. Justice Lambert in Yoshikawa v. Yu (1996), 21 B.C.L.R. (3d) 318 at paras. 12-13 (C.A.).
 Also worthy of note is that when the psychiatric injury arises as consequence of physical injury caused by the defendant, the concept of “reasonable foreseeability” is subject to a qualification. As Madam Justice Bennett stated in Hussack v. Chilliwack School District No. 33, 2011 BCCA 258 at para. 74:
… where the psychiatric injury is consequential to the physical injury for which the defendant is responsible, the defendant is also responsible for the psychiatric injury even if this injury was unforeseeable. See White v. Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police,  2 A.C. 455 at 470, Varga v. John Labbatt,  O.R. 1007, 6 D.L.R. (2d) 336 (H.C.);Yoshikawa v. Yu (1996) 21 B.C.L.R. (3d) 318, 73 B.C.A.C. (C.A.); Edwards v. Marsden, 2004 BCSC 590; Samuel v. Levi, 2008 BCSC 1447.
280] The post-accident deterioration of the Plaintiff’s mental health is clearly delineated in the evidence of the Plaintiff and those who know him and his reports to Dr. Fyfe, in conjunction with the assessment and diagnoses by Dr. Wiseman and treatment by Dr. Hopp. It was and continues to be caused by the injuries he sustained in the accident, most prominently the injury to his left hip that has resulted in two surgeries, years of pain and physical limitation.
 Considering the principles set out in Yoshikawa, the genuine nature of the Plaintiff’s deteriorated mental health is without question. He has been very motivated to engage in psychological treatments and has done so regularly, and he clearly desires to be pain free and resume his former lifestyle and employment. There are several objective root causes identified in his left hip and low back by Dr. Duncan and Dr. Bishop and attributed to the accident for the pain that has undermined his mental health. Based on Hussack the Defendant is also responsible for this injury. Therefore, the Court finds that the injury to the Plaintiff’s left hip was caused by trauma from the accident; the injuries to his spine, in particular his upper and low back, were caused by trauma from the accident; and his deteriorated mental health is directly related to those injuries, primarily the injury to his left hip.  In the present case I find that there is no evidence to permit the Court to conclude that the state of the Plaintiff’s mental health pre-accident would have caused him to become disabled in the future. To the contrary, there is every indication that the Plaintiff was mentally and emotionally stable before the accident.
 Prior to the accident the Plaintiff enjoyed baseball, volleyball, soccer, going camping, travelling and other social activities. His primary recreational pursuit was playing center field for the Dukes. He excelled at the sport and the practices and games were very important to him given that he had played baseball at a very high level since his early teens. He has lost the ability to pursue sports and other recreational activities since the accident. Those that remain, activities like travelling and camping, are much less enjoyable.
 In terms of his broader social relationships, it is clear from the various witnesses who testified, the Plaintiff’s life is much diminished since the accident. It is also clear that the Plaintiff goes out and socializes much less frequently than before. Loyal friends drop by but are unable to pursue the pre-accident activities with him and he no longer has the social interaction arising from baseball or his work.
372] In the present circumstance, the Court is of the view that psychological counselling for the remainder of the Plaintiff’s life with the frequency of six visits per year based on the current BC Psychological Association tariff of $200 per visit (annual cost of $1,200) is a reasonable and medically necessary expense. The psychological counselling sessions are necessary to allow the Plaintiff to deal with the depression and anxiety that has resulted from the changes in his level of functioning since the accident, and the corresponding problems that have arisen in his marriage and his other relationships. The higher amount, compared to Dr. Hopp’s fee, is justified based on the fact that the Plaintiff will almost certainly have to change psychologists during his lifetime given the length of time that he will need counselling. The present value for that service is $28,000, which is to be added to the cost of future care derived by Mr. Benning.