Victims of medical malpractice are often catastrophically harmed, including brain injuries, paraplegia, and even death. Often they have suffered not only the expenses associated with these losses – including medical bills and lost earnings – but they have also suffered emotional distress, pain, suffering, and loss of enjoyment of life.

When such victims bring lawsuits against those responsible, another round of abuse tends to occur. Their lives become an open book. Journals and photos are disclosed and scrutinized. Intimate questions are asked in deposition. And a claimant’s online presence – be it on Facebook or some other social networking site – is often fair game for defense attorneys to search.

A recent article on slate.com addresses this second victimization, detailing case studies in the ways in which claimants’ online information can and is used against them to defeat their claims that they have suffered emotional harm as a result of something the defendant did.

You can read the full article here:

[Evidence of Life on Facebook: Appearing happy on social media may be used against you in a court of law.][1]

Essentially, the defendants in these cases want to show either that there are other reasons for the claimant’s emotional distress, or that the claimant isn’t as harms as she or he is claiming to be.

Take the case of a former general manager in California who sued her former employer due to gender discrimination. As a result of her wrongful termination, she claimed she experienced anguish, anxiety, and isolation from friends as a result. Her former employer’s attorneys dug up dozens of Facebook posts from friends wishing her a happy birthday. The argument? “Would a truly isolated woman get so many birthday wishes on Facebook?”

Of course, what we put on Facebook and how we really feel are often two different things, as the article points out. Facebook users are much more likely to put up pictures or posts that present themselves as attractive, happy and having fun, instead of being lonely or sad. But that distinction can be blurred and lost when a claimant is in front of a jury asking them to award money in damages. Such people are often viewed skeptically to start.

Certainly, a claimant can explain to the jury a particular photo or post and give context to it. But as Ronald Reagan famously said: “when you are explaining, you are losing.”

[1]: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/users/2015/04/social_media_and_the_law_if_you_re_claiming_emotional_distress_don_t_appear.html “Evidence of Life on Facebook: Appearing happy on social media may be used against you in a court of law.”