Barmaid has given the professional lawyer's opinion. I agree.
The defendant has to take as he finds; if you had an unusual sensitivity, such as claustrophobia, it would be no defence, if he were negligent, for him to say that you could only sue for what a healthy person could.
But you were perfectly normal before. You have to prove, by expert medical evidence, including specialists from the defendant's side, that you have a paranoia which is recognised by medical science and that it was caused entirely by negligence of the defendant.
To use a lawyer's expression "Fat chance !". And, as Barmaid says, the damages under this head are minuscule, not worth powder and shot in suing. Also, they are usually tacked on to other claims rather than claimed in their own right; usually some serious injury plus the mental suffering. That's not to say they can't be alone, but when they are they are extremely serious ones, a million miles from your little claim, as yet unproven.
If you want a proper lawyer's expression, try "de minimis non curat lex" (the law is not concerned with trivia ) and "injuria sine damnum" (l wronged but without hurt "