Best question ever!!!! This is one of the most common areas of confusion when nurses are new to legal forensic nursing. Many nurses are used to thinking like neutral clinicians, which is important in healthcare. But when you are hired behind the scenes by an attorney, you are not being hired as the neutral expert witness for both sides. You are being hired as part of one side’s litigation support team. That means your job is not just to list facts. Your job is to help the attorney understand what the records show, where the weaknesses are, where the strengths are, what the defense may argue, and what support exists to strengthen the case. In this example, the student is working on a personal injury dog bite case. The plaintiff was bitten by a dog and later reported symptoms involving his fingers, including numbness. However, the records also show that he has a history of diabetes. This matters because diabetes can sometimes be associated with numbness or nerve-related symptoms. So from a nursing perspective, the student correctly recognized that diabetes could be relevant, and was going to leave it at that in her report and opinion. But in a legal case, we have to think beyond the medical fact alone. The defense attorney may try to argue: “The numbness was not caused by the dog bite. He already had diabetes, and that is why his fingers were numb.” That is why the diabetes matters. It may become a defense argument. But the deeper question is: Did the dog bite cause a new problem, or did it make an existing problem worse? Was his numbness documented before the dog bite? Did it become worse after the dog bite? Did the symptoms involve the same hand or fingers that were injured? Did the records show a change in pain, sensation, function, treatment, or complaints after the bite? Did any provider connect the numbness or nerve symptoms to the dog bite injury? This is the part where we see nurses flop. A basic report by a legal nurse says, “Patient has diabetes and reports numbness.”

MYTH #3: “This sounds like a scam targeting nurses.” This comment was made after a nurse shared what she was doing, how she was working, and what she was being paid. And out of everything being said in these groups, this one is the most concerning. Because it reveals something deeper: Some nurses would rather call something a scam than admit they simply do not understand it, are doing it wrong, or have not figured it out yet. Let’s be clear. Attorneys have always needed help understanding medical cases.That is not new. Medical records have always needed interpretation. Workflows have always needed context. Weaknesses in a case have always needed to be identified early. What is new is that nurses are now being trained to do more than summarize a chart. They are being trained to: • Think beyond the chart • Analyze systems, workflows, and inconsistencies • Identify weaknesses before they become legal problems • See what others miss • Help attorneys understand the medical side of a case more clearly and more strategically That is not a scam.That is a skill set. And skill sets that save time, strengthen cases, and help attorneys make better decisions get paid. So when someone says,“this sounds like a scam targeting nurses,”what they are often really saying is: “I have not seen this before.” “I do not understand how this works.” “I have not been able to make it work myself.” And those are very different statements. Because unfamiliar does not mean fake. Doing it poorly does not mean the field is fake. Not figuring it out yet does not mean others are lying. That is the problem. Nurses who are already exhausted, already questioning their future, and already looking for a different path read comments like this and start doubting something that may actually be very real and very possible for them. It is the VERY REAL THING that saved my career in 2009. AND THANK GOD, I didn't listen to my nurse colleagues. There are nurses doing this work (they are in the next skool group over actually, hundreds of them...)

MYTH #2: “You’re not accounting for marketing/admin time.” This was said to a nurse who shared she billed $12,000 on a case… Someone jumped in to break down her hourly rate and essentially say: 👉 “There’s no way you’re making that… because you didn’t factor in marketing and admin time.” Sounds smart. Sounds logical. But it’s actually based on a misunderstanding of how this business works. Yes - every business has overhead, marketing, admin. Follow-up. That part is true. But here’s what’s missing from that argument 👇 This assumes you stay stuck in a volume-based, always-marketing model forever. You don’t. Not when you provide great work product. This is not a business where you: • Cold message forever • Chase new leads every week • Constantly hunt for work That’s the startup phase. Not the business. Because once attorneys: ✔ Trust your work ✔ Use you once ✔ See the value Everything changes. They come back. They refer you. They keep your name in rotation. And now? You’re not spending hours trying to find work. The work starts finding you. This is what people miss when they try to “do the math.” They’re calculating your income based on a permanent beginner stage. And that’s not reality. This is relationship-based work. Not endless cold outreach. So when someone says: “You’re not accounting for marketing time…” What they’re really doing is applying a short-term lens to a long-term business model. The goal isn’t to market forever. The goal is to: → Do great work→ Build trust→ Stay top of mind And then… You get the call, you keep the attorney, and you keep getting paid. Not all businesses are built on constant hustle. The smart ones? Are built on value… and relationships.

MYTH BUSTING: What’s Being Said in Nurse Facebook Groups 👇 A nurse shared that she billed $12,000 for behind-the-scenes work on a case. The response from one nurse? “I consult with many attorneys… I know what they approve.” Let’s pause there, because comments like need to be addressed. What that statement is really implying is that the nurse who shared her experience must be exaggerating or not telling the truth… and that this commenter somehow knows what attorneys across the legal industry will or will not pay for. And that is simply not accurate. You may know what some attorneys approve, you may know what your experience has exposed you to. But that is not the same as knowing how the entire legal system works. There are: • Small firms and large firms • Plaintiff firms and defense firms • Criminal, civil, and administrative matters • High-value, complex litigation and lower-value case workups • Expert Witness work and Behind-the-Scenes work Each one operates uniquely. Each one has different budgets. Each one uses nurses and medical professionals differently. So when someone makes a sweeping statement like,“I know what attorneys approve,”what they are really saying is,“I know what I’ve personally seen.” And those are two very different things. Why does this matter? Because nurses are in these groups speaking very definitively about fields, roles, and income levels they may have only had limited exposure to. Then when another nurse shares a result that is outside of that limited experience, it immediately gets labeled a scam, impossible, or misleading. That is unfair. That my friends, is the real scam. It also shuts down opportunity for other nurses who are simply trying to learn what is possible. No one person knows every attorney. No one person knows every billing structure. No one person knows every type of case budget in every market. So let’s stop acting like one person’s experience is the absolute standard for an entire field. Saying you know what all attorneys approve is a lot like saying you understand all of healthcare because you’ve worked in one hospital.