i plan on sueing my doctor

[haldy]

hey guys

i had gyno surgery about 4 years ago when is was 16. the doctor that did it butchered me. i have an incision about 2inches long on each side under the nipple and the scar i have is very thick and purple and the left side has tissue left behind the nipple and is kinked. from reading on the net and seeing other people that i know who have had it done. i have concluded the the doctor, should in no way have cut that bigger incision, it should have been around the lower periphery of the areola so if it did scar you wouldn't see it.

i have been to a plastic surgeon who is well respected and he is going to minimise the scaring and take out the rest of the tissue and line it up straight. i am having this done in may at a cost of $2500NZD

i wrote the doctor would did the original surgery a letter asking him to pay for the correction and stated what laws he had obligation under (my father is a lawyer). i saw the doctor today and he is not prepared to take any responsibility and thinks that cutting a 2inch incision is normal practice.

i need to prove that he has negligent, in proforming the surgery this way.

do you guys know of any articles to support me in proving his negligence?

i how looked at the unhappy customers section and i look like a worse case of figure two

please help me get justice.

[vaio]

All I have to say is good luck. Each plastic surgeon has his own techniques of doing things. You agreed to have the surgery. You agreed to where the insicion was going to be. You signed papers. On release forms, it says the possible risks associated with plastic surgery.
Keloid scars are one of them. Is it the Doctors fault in my opinion. No. Also throughout the yearsnew advancements are made. Im not sure that the incision around the areola has been around for too long.
Whats can you do about that?

So, in the next 10 years, when the gland removing canula is perfected. Are the people that had areola excision (incision around areola), as opposed to liposuction with the new gland removing tip and only a tiny incision in the arm pit area,  going to sue because they have a scar around their areola??


Post pictures so we can actually see what you are talking about.  Your case my have been bad enough where an incision like that had to be made. Bottom line. Post pics. Words do no justice.

[haldy]

i will get some pic up.

i am in NZ

i believe that the incision around the areola has been around a while as i have a friend that had it done this way about 10 years ago.

my gyno was not that bad to begin with. before having my surgery nothing was discussed about how big the incision would be or what posible complications there maybe. it was done by a paedictric surgeon.

i do realise that i need to take a step back in time and look at it then and decide if the areola incision was common place then.

in my visit with him that i had today he told me that he still continues to do them like he has done on me, and thats how he was tought.

[vaio]

Its not the Doctors fault though. I am sure your parents signed a legal document protecting the Doctor before surgery. Since you were 16, your mom or dad had to of done it. Surgery would not have been done unless the release was signed. I am sure the Doctor explained exactly what he was going to be doing.The way your body heals (the purple scar) is not the Doctors fault. Thats the way your body heals. Did you expose the scar to sunlight within 6 months post op? Thats could of causes the purple scar.

Your biggest mistake was letting a pediatric surgern do it. You should seen a plastic surgeon. Plastic surgeons are trained to hide the scars. I highly doubt you will win the case. Whats does your father have to say about it all?

[Kk]

Im a medical law student in the UK and just let me say, it's tough to prove what you want to prove. It really comes down to the facts of the case, but in the UK (and most commonwealth law is similar) they problems you will have is with the consent form that was signed and with proving legal causation...

I wont go into it, but basically, if the consent form signed warned of exactly this, then I'm really sorry but they have covered  their back in that respect... you would contest the content of the consent for itself, but that's taking a onctractual angle to it and, well, there's poetntial but still, unlikely to succeed...

How ever if the consent for did not warn of such severe scarring (and im guessing it will be slightly up for interpretation) you will have to prove that the law should hold him accountable - legal causation. He was under a duty of care and did actually cause the "injury", but was there necessarily a breach? In uk we rely on a sace called "Bolitho" which resetablished the long running rule from "Bolam", stating that is a medical procedure is supported by a reasonable, responsible body of professional medical opinion then it does not constitute a breach. I am not sure how close this is to NZD, but under such test there is room to argue that even if he does find other docs that would have made a 2 inch incision and what ever stitching in your particular case, such practice could be considered a breach given that this is a plastic surgery case. The doc is being paid a very high amount of money, therefore the law holds them to a higher duty, and given that the surgery is cosmetic and aesthetic, a 2 inch pruple scar would certainly be against acceptable practice...

Another points that may be useful is regarding  the information you were given, did you read the contract? Did he inform you of all the risks including scarring? It's not simply enough to shove a form under your fathers nose and say sign it. There are 2 people involved here, the patient (youself) and the consent given (your father), and cosmetic surgery is a pretty much undecided upon area in terms of consent issues... there is room for debate on who and what on he should have informed...

Additionally, even if the contract did claim to warm of scarring, you again could claim that your scarring is so severe that it shouldnt be within such scope because of it's being a breach of duty...

Anyway, I'm sorry i cant help you more but it really does come down to specific facts and im not really aware of NZD law...

[headheldhigh01]

it's regrettable that with respect to forms, people are basically at the mercy of the docs and hospitals.  they could basically say you agree to forfeit your firstborn and it's only a small exaggeration to say most people still wouldn't have a choice.  sounds like it boils down to whether he followed the best technique available at the time or not.  

[jc71]

I think the good attorneys would agree that we're really not at the mercy of the forms we sign.  A lot of those forms are created by the medical community, insurance company etc. to make us think we signed something saying we won't seek legal action against them so we never even think to take the first step, which is contacting an attorney.  Your consent form or whatever you signed can probably be challenged in court if you have the time and money to make it happen. I'd seek legal counsel from a medical malpractice attorney.

[theweeninjaguy]

i have a similar scar on my left and it never occurred to me to sue anyone!

IMHO get a life and get over it

ninja