What is soft in soft tissue injury?
This is a very interesting question. Insurance adjusters seem to just call everything a soft tissue injury. They name alone would suggest that since the injury is soft, there should not be much value in this type of injury. But really what is soft?
Medically I cannot answer what is a soft tissue injury (neither can a claim adjuster since they have no medical qualifications), but to a claim adjuster it would be any injury that they cannot easily identify. Headaches are a good example. Can you really tell if someone has a headache or are they faking it? This seems to be the insurance adjuster test.
A broken bone shows absolute and unmistakable evidence that the injury exists, but lower back pain does not. Insurance adjusters should start looking at the scene of the accident more before making an offer of settlement based on “subjective” finding and what they believe is a soft tissue injury.
Most adjusters neglect to see the actual accident wreckage and to realize that nothing could have come out of that other than a something more than a soft tissue injury, and that by no means the accident was “soft” in anyway.
This cannot be their only evaluation of course, but it should play and important part in the evaluation of the injury.
