— Chlorpyrifos · farmworker & child development claims
You lived where the work was. The fields started at the end of the street. In spring the planes came in low, and the smell got into the house, into the laundry on the line, into the water. Years later, a doctor used words like developmental delay. Lawyers are now asking whether the spraying had something to do with it.
🔒 Encrypted & handled per our Privacy Policy
Year chlorpyrifos went
into use in the U.S.
When home and garden
uses were phased out
When Corteva stopped
producing Lorsban
Upfront cost to have
your case reviewed
— Eligibility
Often it has not. In most states, the clock on a child’s injury claim does not start running until they turn 18, which can leave far more time than parents expect. It is worth checking rather than assuming.
— Educational
Chlorpyrifos is an insecticide developed by Dow and first used in 1965. It belongs to a family of chemicals called organophosphates, which kill insects by attacking the nervous system. Farmers bought it under the brand name Lorsban. For more than fifty years it went on orchards, row crops, nut trees and vegetables.
The concern is what it does to a brain that is still being built. A child’s nervous system forms before birth and in the first years of life. It is far more sensitive than an adult’s. Research on organophosphate exposure during pregnancy has reported associations with lower IQ, weaker working memory, attention problems and developmental delay.
A widely cited 2014 study in Environmental Health Perspectives looked at mothers living within about a mile of sprayed fields. Those pregnancies showed a higher reported risk of autism spectrum disorder. The link was strongest for exposure in the second and third trimesters.
Lawsuits allege Dow and Corteva knew the chemical was dangerous to developing nervous systems. They allege the companies knew small repeated doses could cause harm. And they allege the product kept selling without an adequate warning.
Chlorpyrifos is a restricted-use pesticide. Ordinary people could never buy it. Almost everyone exposed was exposed because of somebody else’s work.
You did not have to touch it or work near it. In heavy agricultural areas, exposure came with living there.
— Compensation
If a claim succeeds, compensation is meant to cover what a lifetime of extra care and lost opportunity actually costs a family. Here is what these claims typically seek.
— The process
You do not need records, addresses or dates ready to start. Tell us what you remember and the firm does the rest.
Fill out the short form or call. Where you lived, what work your family did, and your child’s diagnosis. It takes about two minutes. There is no cost and no obligation.
If your situation fits, we connect you with a participating law firm. That firm looks at your case on its own and decides whether to represent you. If it does, you sign an agreement directly with the firm.
Medical and school records, employment history, addresses mapped against state pesticide application data, and water testing where it exists. This is the part that decides a case, and the firm does it.
Your case is filed in the appropriate court. Most claims resolve by settlement rather than trial, and settlements for a child normally need a judge’s approval. You are never required to accept an offer you do not want.
— Why people use us
💰
We connect you with firms that handle agricultural chemical and toxic exposure cases — work that depends on building an exposure record, not just a diagnosis.
You do not need records, spray data or old addresses in hand. Tell us what you remember and the firm gathers the rest.
A legal marketing and referral service. We check whether your situation matches what participating law firms are looking for, and connect you with one of them if it does.
What Direct2Attorney is not
We are not a law firm. We cannot give you legal advice, represent you, or file anything on your behalf. Only a law firm you sign with can do that.
Participating law firms are generally reviewing claims from families with heavy exposure to chlorpyrifos who have a child diagnosed with autism, ADHD, intellectual disability, developmental delay or another neurological condition. That usually means a parent who worked in the fields or handled the pesticide, a mother who lived or worked near sprayed fields while pregnant, or a household in a farming community affected by spray drift or contaminated water. Adults with acute poisoning injuries may also qualify.
Not entirely, and this is widely misreported. Home and garden uses ended around 2001. EPA revoked all food tolerances in August 2021, but in November 2023 the Eighth Circuit vacated that rule and the tolerances were reinstated in December 2023. Today chlorpyrifos remains registered for 11 food and feed crops in certain states and is a restricted-use pesticide that only certified applicators may use. EPA is expected to issue a further decision in 2026.
The claims involve neurodevelopmental harm in children, including autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, intellectual disability, developmental delay and reduced cognitive function, alleged to result from exposure in the womb or in early childhood. Some claims also involve acute poisoning of adult farmworkers, and some involve property contamination.
No, and it is important to be honest about that. Most autism is not caused by pesticide exposure. Genetics play a large role, and no medical test can prove what caused any individual child’s condition. What these lawsuits argue is that heavy exposure during pregnancy or early childhood increased the risk. Whether that argument fits your family depends on how much exposure there actually was, which is what a review looks at.
Yes. Chlorpyrifos is a restricted-use pesticide, so ordinary consumers could not buy it. Nearly everyone exposed was exposed by someone else’s application. Living near treated fields, breathing spray drift, drinking contaminated water, or having a parent bring residue home on clothing and boots are all exposure routes described in these lawsuits.
Nothing to ask. The case review is free with no obligation. If a participating law firm takes your case, it will normally work on contingency. That means the fee comes out of a recovery, and no fee is owed if there is no recovery.
No. Direct2Attorney is a legal marketing and referral service, not a law firm. An attorney-client relationship may form only after a participating law firm reviews your information and signs a separate representation agreement with you.
Ask it on the call. The review is free, and there is no obligation to move forward.
