Chiropractors vs Traditional Medicine vs Alternative Medicine

We have mentioned chiropractors favorably throughout this site because we have found that, for soft tissue injuries, their treatment provides the best recovery in the shortest time at the lowest cost. However, there are many other types of injuries that a person may sustain in an accident for which medical treatment or alternative treatment may be more appropriate. For example, an orthopedic surgeon best treats a broken bone, and a case of nerve damage is best brought to a neurologist. Also, there are examples of chiropractors who overbill and require so many treatments that the claimant will not recover the full cost of treatment in her settlement.
As discussed elsewhere, medical specialists such as orthopedic surgeons often are not as active in their support of your financial recovery as are general practitioners or chiropractors. Should they be? Aren't they committed to practice medicine and get you better? Those are questions you will have to resolve.
In the best of all possible worlds, a doctor or medical professional would fulfill both roles - aiding both your physical recovery and your financial recovery. The arrogance displayed by some medical specialists toward the claims recovery process works against the claimant the doctor will not write medical records in support of causation or showing the actual severity of damages. They will tell the claimant many things in the office, but their written medical records will not support what they have said about the cause of his injury, the relationship between the accident and injury suffered, or - if it was even discussed -- the significance of the damage in terms of monetary recovery. Those doctors are very conservative in attributing serious injuries to an accident, particularly if a significant amount of time has elapsed between the accident and their examination or if the type of injury is one that many people commonly suffer later in life.
Two examples of these will demonstrate the arrogance and prejudice of certain medical specialists. In many cases, there are changes in bone structure, which can be attributed either to trauma (the physical aspect of an accident) or to age. One example is bone spurring or degenerative changes in bone structure. It is common for medical specialists to see this type of change in people over the years. Therefore, if possible, they are going to hedge on attributing these changes to an accident, unless they have access x-rays taken before the trauma. In the absence of complaints of pain or restriction of movement over the years, it is possible to take a clinical history and, through medical examination, conclude beyond a medical certainty (more probable than not) that the degenerative changes were the result of the trauma. However, in the majority of cases, medical specialists will hedge on the topic and pick the path of least resistance. This is why we say they don't want to stand up for their patient.
A second example is one in which a a dentist has not kept track of the research and reports in the past decade in respect to TMJ causation. It is now commonly understood (although still argued by the insurance industry) that severe whiplash can cause a jaw joint injury. This can result in the movement of a disc within the jaw joint that causes a number of symptoms. The symptoms can grow increasingly active over the years, progressing from a general ache to a headache to popping and snapping when chewing.
If you follow our instructions on SettlementCentral.Com, you will discuss any such pain with your medical doctor (see Jane Jaw Joint Coming soon) or chiropractor. Ask for a referral to a dentist familiar with TMJ. Make an appointment, and keep it. Stay on top of such a potential problem from the very first symptom so you will have a record of the pain.
What so often happens, instead, is that a patient mentions such pain to her doctor, who suggests a referral to a dentist. The patient chooses instead to see her own dentist, a general practitioner with limited knowledge of TMJ but who is aware that either stress or a direct blow to the head can cause TMJ problems. He will, therefore, question the patient about any stress in her life. He may then conclude that he is unable to determine the source of the problem, but he will mention the stress and the auto accident. The problem with this incomplete analysis is that he has just undermined the patient's TMJ claim, and she will have extreme difficulty receiving any compensation for the pain and medical attention she will incur because of the injury to her jaw.