Malpractice

[+ sam.fitzpatrick]

I'm usually of the opinion that most malpractice lawsuits request too much in damages as misdiagnosis and honest mistakes may happen. However, this is one case that I side with the patient.

 

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/patient-wakes-up-from-circumcision-to-find-penis-removed.html

 

My brother-in-law had this type of cancer two years ago. His was in his rectum, so still a delicate situation. However, when discovered, he had time to consider the treatment options.

[+ purplekow]

They may have been extenuating circumstances such as uncontrollable bleeding or some such, however, this seems as though this surgery could have been stopped and then further surgery done as needed and wanted.

[MsGuy]

The jury decided that the surgeon's actions did not warrant an award of damages.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/24/us-kentucky-penis-amputation-idUSTRE77N80X20110824

[+ purplekow]

Now I am just as fond of my penis as the next guy, but 16 million dollars for a penis, come on. Reconstructive surgery could probably go a long way in restoring a cancerous penis. Anyone here ever see, feel or taste a $16 million penis?

[+ deej]

There's actually a joke about that:

 

A man wakes up in the hospital to learn that he was in a devastating traffic accident and had been in a coma for several weeks. The doctors solemnly reviewed his injuries, waiting until the end to inform him that he'd lost his penis in the accident.

 

"But there's good news! We can rebuild it just as good as new with reconstructive surgery. It's expensive, but your insurance settlement is $10,000 which should just exactly cover it."

 

They told him to talk it over with his wife and sleep on it.

 

The next day, the doctor enters the room to find the man weeping inconsolably. When asked why he was weeping, the man wailed "WE'RE GETTING GRANITE COUNTER TOPS".

[+ nycman]

Not malpractice.

 

The surgeon did the right thing...as did the jury.

 

Many people (and juries) confuse "bad outcome" and "unfortunate bastard" with malpractice....

hence the current fucked up state of American medical care.

 

Obama lost his chance to reform health-care the minute he declared there would be

no malpractice tort reform as a part of his plan.

[Guest]

Well, this case was not malpractice, although one could possibly make a case for assault and battery. The surgeon did the right thing from a medical standpoint, and the patient was not harmed by medical error. Since the patient had not formally consented to the procedure, I could see how the argument could be made for battery, but the truth of the matter was that the "victim" was functionally illiterate. If the form had added the phrase "circumcision and any such procedure as the surgeon deemed medically necessary," I'm sure the patient would have signed it just the same. In reading the case, it's obvious that the patient was an idiot who lived his life being a professional "victim," collecting social security, which, by law should only be received by someone unable to perform ANY job in the U.S. The request for $16 million was so outrageous that it probably angered the jury (as it would have angered me). In an any case, it's obvious he wasn't able to have sex before the surgery, and that sex would have been a challenge in any situation, even if the cancer had been left there. I guess this is another argument for considering neonatal circumcision, since penile cancer is almost unheard of in circumcised men.

[Guest]

In an any case, it's obvious he wasn't able to have sex before the surgery, and that sex would have been a challenge in any situation, even if the cancer had been left there. I guess this is another argument for considering neonatal circumcision, since penile cancer is almost unheard of in circumcised men.

 

This statement is supported by the fact that the patient later had the entire penis amputated--and seems to nullify the argument that he wouldn't have consented to the first surgery.

[Guest]

The Huffington Post gives a more complete description of the case:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/24/ky-jury-rules-against-pen_n_935440.html?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl12|sec3_lnk1|89126