Pain and suffering estimated with two methods so you can compare both.
Rough estimate only. Not legal advice - consult an attorney.
The multiplier method, the approach most insurers default to, multiplies your medical bills by a severity factor to stand in for pain and suffering. This calculator runs that math alongside a second approach, the per-diem method, which prices each day of your recovery instead. Both numbers appear side by side so you can see how differently the two conventions treat the same injury.
| Severity tier | Multiplier applied to medical bills |
|---|---|
| Minor | 1.5× |
| Moderate | 2.5× |
| Serious | 3.5× |
| Severe | 4.5× |
| Catastrophic | 5× |
A minor strain that clears up in a few weeks sits at the bottom of the range, 1.5 times your medical bills. A catastrophic or permanent injury can justify the top of the range, five times or more. Clear diagnostic imaging, a consistent treatment record, and documented daily-life impact all push your case up that scale; gaps in treatment or a thin medical record pull it back down.
The per-diem method suits a recovery with a defined endpoint, a broken bone that heals in twelve weeks, for example, where a daily dollar figure times the number of recovery days feels concrete. The multiplier method suits severe or permanent injuries where a handful of medical bills understate the real, lasting harm. Enter both sets of numbers above and compare which story your case actually tells.
Non-economic damages: physical pain, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and similar harm that doesn't have a receipt attached to it, as opposed to medical bills or lost wages, which do.
Your medical bills are multiplied by a factor, roughly 1.5 for minor injuries up to 5 for catastrophic ones, chosen based on severity and how well the injury is documented.
You set a daily dollar value for your suffering and multiply it by the number of days in your recovery. It's often anchored to your daily wage as a rough, relatable baseline.
Most adjusters default to a multiplier-based approach, but nothing stops you from presenting a per-diem calculation as a counter-argument, especially for a long, well-documented recovery.
Yes. Showing both calculations, and explaining why your case supports the higher one, is a common and reasonable negotiating tactic.