Symptoms Without Clear Pathology: Dr Bruno Silva Shares His Medico-Legal Expertise
Ardent Expert Chambers Member Dr Bruno Silva, Consultant Neuropsychiatrist, delivered a focused webinar examining functional and otherwise unexplained neurological presentations in Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence cases.
The session explored a particularly challenging area of medico-legal practice: cases where an individual reports persistent neurological symptoms despite conventional investigations providing no clear structural explanation.
Drawing on his specialist neuropsychiatric expertise, Dr Silva examined how these presentations should be assessed, how functional neurological disorder may be distinguished from malingering, and why a positive diagnosis based on recognised clinical features is more robust than simply reaching a diagnosis because other explanations have been excluded.
When Symptoms and Imaging Do Not Align
Persistent neurological symptoms can present a difficult clinical and medico-legal picture where imaging and other investigations appear normal.
Symptoms may include weakness, altered sensation, tremor, gait disturbance, episodes resembling seizures or other changes in neurological function.
The absence of visible structural pathology does not, however, mean that the symptoms themselves are not genuine.
Dr Silva highlighted the importance of moving beyond a simple search for an abnormal scan and examining the complete clinical presentation, including the pattern of symptoms, examination findings and the way those symptoms affect everyday functioning.
For the neuropsychiatric expert, the task is to determine whether the presentation is consistent with a recognised disorder and to explain the reasoning behind that conclusion clearly.
Functional Neurological Disorder as a Positive Diagnosis
A central theme of Dr Silva’s webinar was that functional neurological disorder should not simply be treated as a diagnosis of exclusion.
Modern assessment instead looks for positive clinical features that support the diagnosis.
This distinction is important.
An expert opinion based solely on the absence of structural disease risks oversimplifying a complex presentation. Dr Silva explored how recognised patterns, examination findings and internal inconsistencies can provide affirmative evidence supporting a functional diagnosis.
The expert must then place those findings within the wider neurological, psychiatric and clinical context.
Distinguishing Functional Symptoms From Malingering
Another important area of Dr Silva’s discussion was the distinction between functional symptoms and deliberate symptom production.
Functional neurological symptoms are not synonymous with malingering.
A patient may experience genuine and disabling symptoms even where those symptoms cannot be explained by conventional structural pathology.
Malingering, by contrast, involves the intentional production or exaggeration of symptoms for an external purpose.
For an expert witness, conflating these fundamentally different concepts can lead to serious errors in interpretation.
Dr Silva’s approach emphasises careful clinical assessment and evidence-based reasoning rather than drawing conclusions about motivation simply because investigations are normal or symptoms appear unusual.
Understanding Symptom Validity
Dr Silva also explored the role of symptom validity within neuropsychiatric assessment.
Where symptoms are disputed, an expert may need to consider whether the reported difficulties are consistent across the available evidence and how they relate to clinical examination, documented behaviour and functional ability.
This does not mean treating every inconsistency as evidence of dishonesty.
Symptoms can fluctuate, and complex neurological and psychiatric presentations may produce patterns that initially appear contradictory.
The expert’s role is therefore to analyse those inconsistencies carefully, consider plausible clinical explanations and remain clear about what the evidence does and does not establish.
Diagnosis and Causation Are Separate Questions
Identifying a functional neurological presentation does not automatically determine why it developed.
Dr Silva highlighted the importance of separating diagnosis from causation.
In a medico-legal case, an expert may need to consider whether symptoms arose following an accident, injury or episode of clinical care, whether there were pre-existing vulnerabilities or symptoms, and whether alternative explanations are supported by the evidence.
Temporal association alone may not be sufficient to establish causation.
A detailed neuropsychiatric opinion therefore requires examination of the chronology, clinical records, previous history and development of symptoms rather than relying solely on the fact that symptoms appeared after a particular event.
The Importance of Accurate Diagnosis
Accurate diagnosis has consequences beyond the wording of an expert report.
Dr Silva discussed how the interpretation of unexplained neurological symptoms can influence treatment, rehabilitation and expectations around longer-term outcome.
Where functional neurological disorder is identified, an appropriate management approach may differ significantly from one designed to treat structural neurological disease.
Equally, an incorrect assumption that symptoms are either structurally caused or deliberately produced can direct treatment down the wrong path.
This makes precise diagnostic reasoning particularly important when considering future care and prognosis.
Neuropsychiatric Evidence and Long-Term Outcome
Complex cases may also require consideration of how symptoms affect an individual's ability to function over time.
The severity of a presentation cannot always be understood through diagnostic labels alone.
Dr Silva’s discussion highlighted the importance of examining functional impact, treatment response and the wider psychological and neurological context when considering prognosis.
A balanced expert opinion may therefore need to address both the legitimacy of the symptoms being reported and the uncertainty that can remain around their future course.
Specialist Expertise in Complex Neuropsychiatric Presentations
As a Consultant Neuropsychiatrist, Dr Silva specialises in presentations that sit at the intersection of neurology and psychiatry, including cases where symptoms are significant but conventional structural investigations do not provide a complete explanation.
His webinar demonstrated the importance of a structured approach to functional neurological symptoms, diagnostic uncertainty, symptom validity, causation and prognosis.
Rather than relying on the absence of pathology, his approach focuses on identifying positive clinical evidence, considering competing explanations and clearly defining the limits of the available evidence.
This is particularly valuable in disputed cases where the central question is not simply whether symptoms exist, but how they should properly be understood.
Dr Bruno Silva is a member of Ardent Expert Chambers. View his full member profile to learn more about his specialist expertise and medico-legal practice.
View experts in Neuropsychiatry
View Experts
