|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 23, 2011 6:51:00 GMT -5
come out with an amputation. www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14619926Guy goes into the hospital for what he thought was a circumcision. Surgeon found penile cancer and amputated. I think it's funny that many women would go in for a biopsy for breast cancer and wake up with a masectomy. Yet when the shoe's on the other foot, it becomes a court case. Guys, would you sacrifice your penis to save your life?
|
|
Bluerobin
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:24:30 GMT -5
Posts: 17,345
Location: NEPA
|
Post by Bluerobin on Aug 23, 2011 7:20:17 GMT -5
I would see if he signed the agreement - if the surgeon amputated without permission, I think he would be liable. The biopsy thing usually carries additional permission, but does the circumcision surgical agreement do the same?
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 7:23:49 GMT -5
That depends. If I were going to die then yes. However, the guy most certainly had the right to more medical opinions. It isn't right for ANY doctor to perform ANY surgery that he didn't have concent from the patient to do.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 23, 2011 7:28:30 GMT -5
According to today's paper, the cancer was so advanced that it had already obstructed urine flow - the surgeon had difficulty inserting a catheter. The surgeon was worried about possible kidney damage.
Circumcision was to alleviate inflammation - which as it turns out, was not caused by a bacterial source but a malignancy.
|
|
|
Post by theamazinggomez on Aug 23, 2011 7:29:23 GMT -5
Couldn't there be a more truncated version?
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Aug 23, 2011 7:30:36 GMT -5
'Loss of service'
That's one way of describing it
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 23, 2011 7:32:44 GMT -5
I think he should have awoken the patient and discussed the situation with him. I hated the way doctors would just cut off a woman's breast without even a "bye your leave." Wrong then and wrong now. Male or female.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 7:45:01 GMT -5
You're not going to die from penile cancer in two days. He should have given the patient time to decide it wasn't like his heart had stopped or something.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 23, 2011 7:54:02 GMT -5
How would you "wake' someone under deep surgical anesthesia? And if you did, and had to re-sedate, do you think it would be pain-free and safe? Remember, most pain killers are respiratory depressants and typically an airtube is shoved down your throat during surgery.
Not anymore.
I had a hip replacement with an epidural and light sedation. Most people come out of this immediately cognizant.
When I had my gall bladder surgery 6 weeks later, I was put under general anesthesia and once again, came out of it very quickly. Not only that, 24 hours later I was once again anesthesized for a second procedure with no problems and came out of the anesthesia the second time as easily as the first.
There *should* have been no problems with stopping the surgery and reversing the drugs for anesthesia. Once the patient was aware of his issues afterwards, he could be anesthesized again for a second surgery without problem.
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Aug 23, 2011 8:03:18 GMT -5
We'd be ready if Pig didn't make it through the second operation.
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Aug 23, 2011 8:06:44 GMT -5
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002255/The 5 year survival rate doesn't look very good (1 in about 3 dies) and the link comments that it can metastasizes early in the disease's development. Of course, if they hadn't amputated, his widow might still be suing for loss of companionship citing they should have done more
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 23, 2011 8:11:32 GMT -5
I have had surgery and I was quite out. Circumcision in an adult male is notoriously painful and there is every probability nothing light was used.
Surgery today is quite different from 10 years ago, toughtimes....or even the last rounds of surgery that I had 4 years ago. There are new anesthesia techniques that WILL have you quite out, but the drugs that they use will bring you around quite quickly.
I guarantee you that I was as sedated for them to cut off my femoral head and ream out my acetabulum as you'd need to be for a circumcision.
|
|
Wizard of Id
Familiar Member
Do I mix the Red with the Green...or.....Green with Red??
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 15:11:26 GMT -5
Posts: 834
|
Post by Wizard of Id on Aug 23, 2011 8:36:43 GMT -5
That depends. If I were going to die then yes. However, the guy most certainly had the right to more medical opinions. It isn't right for ANY doctor to perform ANY surgery that he didn't have concent from the patient to do.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 8:42:15 GMT -5
I have had surgery and I was quite out. How did the circumcision go TT?
|
|
Bluerobin
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:24:30 GMT -5
Posts: 17,345
Location: NEPA
|
Post by Bluerobin on Aug 23, 2011 8:45:02 GMT -5
tough, maybe he would opt to do nothing - he should be given the choice. Maybe he would opt to try the asparagus cure. No matter what, he should have been given the chance to make the decision. I would be trying like hell to sue the surgeon for exceeding his authority.
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Aug 23, 2011 8:47:13 GMT -5
I would give the doctors the benefit of the doubt in this case so long as the diagnosis was correct and the treatment reasonable. We are not talking a strep throat here.
They settled out of court so I suspect it could well have been a business decision even if it was clear there was no medical practice issue. How much is further litigation going to cost us versus the cost of a settlement with the plaintiffs?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Aug 23, 2011 8:54:14 GMT -5
So a surgeon trained to save lives...saves a life. Yes, perhaps he should have stopped, whatever. Do you destroy his ability to practice by sending his insurance through the roof? That poor soul probably would have lost his magic twanger or his life, one way or another. But it's the poor soul's decision to make. Not the docs.
|
|
Bluerobin
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:24:30 GMT -5
Posts: 17,345
Location: NEPA
|
Post by Bluerobin on Aug 23, 2011 8:55:07 GMT -5
If they settled, they knew the surgeon was wrong. Before you cut something off of mine, you damn well better have premission from me or my POA.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 8:55:23 GMT -5
So a surgeon trained to save lives...saves a life
They are there to make money. He would rather bill the patient for "penis removal: $55,000" than "Did not operate: $0"
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 23, 2011 9:02:58 GMT -5
They are there to make money. He would rather bill the patient for "penis removal: $55,000" than "Did not operate: $0"
The surgeon *could* have gotten even more had he followed protocol. Instead of 'penis amputation: $55K' (which is unlikely, my orthopedic surgeon only received $3500 for my complicated hip replacement) he could have gotten 'exploratory surgery: $10K PLUS penis amputation: $55K'.
He wouldn't have gotten $0 for opening him up and closing him up.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 9:08:44 GMT -5
I went in for an appendectomy and the surgeon thought I was acting a little weird so he gave me a lobotomy. He saved my life!
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 9:12:23 GMT -5
Yeah let me hear you sing that tune when you go in for a breast reduction and come out titless.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 9:19:47 GMT -5
You're right! The problem is he mutilated a patient without the patients consent. That is NEVER OK!
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 9:23:59 GMT -5
Yes, because we all know the chances of it metastasizing in the next four hours are 100%. It's his choice to make not some dr playing God.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,332
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Aug 23, 2011 9:26:01 GMT -5
I'd be PISSED. I don't care that I am on the table and it's handy to just lop it off now. I would want the opportunity to give written informed consent to the procedure before they start lopping off my body parts. Or if I can't give the consent, whoever is designated to do that for me.
I don't care that it is for the "greater good", it is MY body and I should not wake up missing body parts because the doctor decided it was handy to just go ahead and make that decision for me.
And I also disagree this was so life threatening that hte doctor could not have waited to inform the patient and get his consent. It wasn't like he was going to die right there on the operating table if the doctor did not do something right now.
Was it the only option? Maybe. But the patient should have been able to exercise his rights to decline the procedure.
Just as women should have years ago when doctors decided to just lop off boobs and take uteruses because "hey you are done with them and they might be cancerous!" Umm. .. no. Those doctors too thought they were doing what was in the best interests of their patients but medical ethics now disagrees.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Aug 23, 2011 9:51:20 GMT -5
No, it is much better to wait until it metastasizes and then he loses it anyway and his life as well. Understand, when you have cancer, you are on a time-clock. It doesn't wait until you make up your mind. With every moment, the cancer is spitting, sending malevolent, life-taking cells into every portion of your body. I know that sitting on untreated cancer is a death sentence. Who knows what the man would have done if he had the choice? Nonetheless, none of those choices is very appetizing. Good god, we're not advocating not telling the guy. A day isn't going to make a difference.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 23, 2011 9:54:47 GMT -5
The point is toughtimes, this was NOT the surgeon's decision to make - it was the patient's.
The results of end stage cancer may have been the same, depending upon this guy's prognosis. If he would have lived 6 months with his penis, or 6 month's without his penis it was HIS DECISION TO MAKE. He would have been dealing with end stage cancer, regardless (according to the stats that TD posted).
At this point, a day is not going to make a bit of difference.
FWIW, I HAVE dealt with a parent with end stage lung cancer. My mom did not undergo anything but pallative treatment, but again.....THIS WAS HER DECISION TO MAKE.
|
|
|
Post by pig on Aug 23, 2011 9:57:05 GMT -5
It's a good thing TD doesn't have to worry about a problem like this!
|
|
Regie
Established Member
I am a big mean snow leopard, yes I AM
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 15:13:24 GMT -5
Posts: 461
|
Post by Regie on Aug 23, 2011 9:59:46 GMT -5
What I got from the article is that the patient had signed a consent form, as I faintly remember having signed before surgery authorizing necessary treatment in unforeseen circumstances. The doctor in the first surgery only removed a portion of the penis and the rest was removed in a second operation.
So the doctor did have permission to remove the part he did. The patient was allowed to decide if he wanted the rest removed and he did. Not seeing any reason to sue here.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 23, 2011 10:39:42 GMT -5
That makes more sense. I cannot imagine in this sue crazy society someone cutting off a man's dick without his permission. Especially another man.
|
|