Generally, there are two reasons people criticize the multiplier method. One criticism is focused on the argument of arbitrary multipliers, meaning that due to the fact that different attorneys use different multipliers, the results are often inconsistent. For example, one attorney may triple the special damages, while another might apply a multiplier of six, opening up a wide gap of variance between the two estimated sums. Additionally, the multiplier method can produce misleading results. For example, a drummer who injures their wrists in a car accident might have lower medical bills than an administrative assistant with a wrist injury that requires expensive surgery. However, the administrative assistant would likely be able to return to work after recovering from the surgery, while the drummer may suffer from severe emotional and psychological distress because they can no longer make a living playing music.
By simply looking at the cost of medical bills, the multiplier method can fail to account for more long-term costs and immaterial damage that will affect someone for the rest of their life.