Citation

Brown EM. Behav. Sci. Law 1990; 8(4): 421-434.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1990, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/bsl.2370080408

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

During the late 19th century, as a result of litigation following railway accidents, damage claims for emotional injuries became a medico-legal issue. Efforts to find fair and socially acceptable means of settling such claims involved an interaction between medical theory and legal rules. Between 1866 and 1890 doctors debated the significance of 'nervous' symptoms, which resulted from accidents in which Little or no physical damage occurred. They rejected a strictly somatic interpretation of these symptoms and replaced it with a psychosomatic interpretation. Hoping to prevent a fiood of 'false claims', Anglo-American courts initially rejected this psychosomatic interpretation, and ruled against damages in cases where fear without physical impact was the cause of the plaintiffs symptoms. Later, common law courts accepted the psychosomatic perspective and granted damages for physical illnesses in which fear was 'one link in the chain of causation'. While early appeals under workers' compensation laws followed these later courts, worries about the social consequences ofthese rulings were also evident in the years before the First World War.

Language: en