![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
Despite considerable scientific evidence to the contrary, many medical practitioners maintain that children recover from brain injury better than adults. This belief, which is commonly referred to as the 'Kennard Principle', has important ramifications for personal injury compensation claims in which the amount of financial damages claimed is partly based on medical experts' prognoses for recovery and long-term outcome. The present study investigated whether legal practitioners' beliefs are consistent with those of medical practitioners. Lawyers were asked to estimate their confidence in consultant neurologists' estimates of recovery in four clinically-based but fictitious case studies which differed only in the reported age of the patient. The lawyers showed more confidence in estimates which coincided with the Kennard Principle than those which did not. These results support previous findings in showing widespread belief that 'younger is better' in recovery from brain injury. In consequence, it is likely that financial compensation for children with brain injury is currently being underestimated in litigation, thereby prejudicing the long-term outcome of the child.