Healthcare litigation today is shaped by social inflation, emotional persuasion, and an
increasingly aggressive plaintiff bar that relies on inflated numbers to drive verdicts and
settlements. The core challenge for the defense is that plaintiffs typically frame value
first—through life-care plans, emotional narratives, and reptile strategies—and these early
numbers create powerful psychological anchors that shape all later perceptions of the
case. Even when jurors recognize a demand as extreme, they still use it as the starting
point for their internal valuation.

To restore fairness, the defense must reclaim the responsibility of defining value early and
consistently. Anchoring serves as the central strategy for achieving this. Research shows
that the party who makes the first credible offer gains a measurable advantage, influencing
counteroffers, settlement ranges, and even eventual jury awards. Early anchoring requires
a disciplined process: gathering all medical, functional, and cost records within the first
90–120 days; analyzing actual costs rather than billed charges; identifying government and
insurance benefits; retaining experts who can explain realistic future needs; and
developing a defensible damages model before the plaintiff presents theirs.

Read more of the white paper