Medical ethics?

[warmodder]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: thecrecarc

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: thecrecarc

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: warmodder

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: irishScott
No. Hippocratic oath: Do no harm.

Same reason assisted suicide is illegal in 49 states

She wasn't harmed though...

So if I ambushed her in an ally the day before the surgery, and cut off her breasts with a machete (think Rwanda), assuming she gets rushed to the hospital and survives without a hitch, did I harm her?

Same net result as her getting them removed... excluding emotional damage.

Um, she consented to the procedure. Why would it be malpractice? It's a legitimate preventative measure.

legitimate? i don't think so. she has a possiblity of getting cancer. it is not a gurenteed. to remove her breast is a huge mental and physical issue. not to mention that is no gurentee that she won't get cancer latter anyway.

they should have just kept closer eye on her. have regular visits to the doctor. to cut off part of the body for no reason is unethical.

There is a reason. to reduce the RISK of getting cancer. and she consented to the procedure.

there are also far less risky and phsyicaly/emmotionaly risky ways to watch for cancer. IF (there is no gurentee it will show up) it shows up then you can go to such way s to fight it.

but she decided instead of taking the risk of cancer showing up and having to go through treatment, she will perform sugurgy to reduce the risk by what i assume a large ammount. again, its her choice. The doctor is not at fault here.

Like waggy said, there are other, far less damaging options to try first. Also, anyone willing to go that far has psychological issues that need to be addressed. Period. That makes her unable to know what's best for her.

Psychological issues? You mean like the will to live? I'm glad we have you around to know what's best for everyone!

 

[Deeko]

I think people here are just reading into this wrong.

You can disagree with the decision. You can disagree with the advice. However, it is very clearly NOT malpractice.

 

[MotionMan]

Prophylactic mastectomy: Breast cancer prevention for high-risk women - From the Mayo Clinic

MotionMan

 

[compuwiz1]

Text Breast cancer is not the only disease that people try and prevent up front. The link to the story I just posted is where a man had his stomach removed to prevent getting stomach cancer. :shocked:

 

[everman]

If this is an accepted medical practice for this situation and the Dr. acted as a medical professional should in good faith, then there's probably no problem with it.

 

[bignateyk]

LOL @ those of you who said malpractice. She consented to the procedure. She might have been the one to ask for it in the first place. It's not like she is the only person to have ever had this done. I think some of you need to read up on what malpractice actually is.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: thecrecarc

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: irishScott
No. Hippocratic oath: Do no harm.

Same reason assisted suicide is illegal in 49 states

She wasn't harmed though...

So if I ambushed her in an ally the day before the surgery, and cut off her breasts with a machete (think Rwanda), assuming she gets rushed to the hospital and survives without a hitch, did I harm her?

Same net result as her getting them removed... excluding emotional damage.

...

those are two totally different situations. in the OP, she was totally aware of what was happening, and had an option of saying yes or no. She also was aware of the risks of doing it and not doing it and made what i assume a educated decision. also, the doctor was fully trained and knew what he/she was doing.

She also had the full option of saying no. If she said no, its not like the doctor would kidnap her and do it anyways.

It is the doctors job to Refuse.

 

[oogabooga]

Originally posted by: Deeko
I think people here are just reading into this wrong.

You can disagree with the decision. You can disagree with the advice. However, it is very clearly NOT malpractice.

Yup, assuming that the doctor made it clear that this is what he would recommend but laid out the pros/cons of both sides, I dont see how this is malpractice. To the best of my knowledge what is in the OP is accepted medical practice, it isn't like he's saying buy a voodoo doll.

In fact, I would imagine the opposite being more defensible as malpractice. The dr never mentioning that she has the option to do that and then contracting breast cancer a few months later when it could have been avoided.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: warmodder

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: irishScott
No. Hippocratic oath: Do no harm.

Same reason assisted suicide is illegal in 49 states

She wasn't harmed though...

So if I ambushed her in an ally the day before the surgery, and cut off her breasts with a machete (think Rwanda), assuming she gets rushed to the hospital and survives without a hitch, did I harm her?

Same net result as her getting them removed... excluding emotional damage.

Um, she consented to the procedure. Why would it be malpractice? It's a legitimate preventative measure.

Is that a fact. What is being prevented?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers
It is the doctors job to Refuse.

Nope. It's the patient's. This is why you can get second/third opinions and chose your course of action.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: warmodder

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: irishScott
No. Hippocratic oath: Do no harm.

Same reason assisted suicide is illegal in 49 states

She wasn't harmed though...

So if I ambushed her in an ally the day before the surgery, and cut off her breasts with a machete (think Rwanda), assuming she gets rushed to the hospital and survives without a hitch, did I harm her?

Same net result as her getting them removed... excluding emotional damage.

Um, she consented to the procedure. Why would it be malpractice? It's a legitimate preventative measure.

legitimate? i don't think so. she has a possiblity of getting cancer. it is not a gurenteed. to remove her breast is a huge mental and physical issue. not to mention that is no gurentee that she won't get cancer latter anyway.

they should have just kept closer eye on her. have regular visits to the doctor. to cut off part of the body for no reason is unethical.

Exactly, since she no longer has breasts she can't get breast cancer but what about lung cancer,throat cancer, etc.
Why do the doctors draw the lion at the breasts?

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: warmodder

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: irishScott
No. Hippocratic oath: Do no harm.

Same reason assisted suicide is illegal in 49 states

She wasn't harmed though...

So if I ambushed her in an ally the day before the surgery, and cut off her breasts with a machete (think Rwanda), assuming she gets rushed to the hospital and survives without a hitch, did I harm her?

Same net result as her getting them removed... excluding emotional damage.

Um, she consented to the procedure. Why would it be malpractice? It's a legitimate preventative measure.

legitimate? i don't think so. she has a possiblity of getting cancer. it is not a gurenteed. to remove her breast is a huge mental and physical issue. not to mention that is no gurentee that she won't get cancer latter anyway.

they should have just kept closer eye on her. have regular visits to the doctor. to cut off part of the body for no reason is unethical.

Exactly, since she no longer has breasts she can't get breast cancer but what about lung cancer,throat cancer, etc.
Why do the doctors draw the lion at the breasts?

i hope they are not drawing lions on the breast. that won't protect against cancer at all.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers


Is that a fact. What is being prevented?

uh, cancer

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: thecrecarc

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: warmodder

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: irishScott
No. Hippocratic oath: Do no harm.

Same reason assisted suicide is illegal in 49 states

She wasn't harmed though...

So if I ambushed her in an ally the day before the surgery, and cut off her breasts with a machete (think Rwanda), assuming she gets rushed to the hospital and survives without a hitch, did I harm her?

Same net result as her getting them removed... excluding emotional damage.

Um, she consented to the procedure. Why would it be malpractice? It's a legitimate preventative measure.

legitimate? i don't think so. she has a possiblity of getting cancer. it is not a gurenteed. to remove her breast is a huge mental and physical issue. not to mention that is no gurentee that she won't get cancer latter anyway.

they should have just kept closer eye on her. have regular visits to the doctor. to cut off part of the body for no reason is unethical.

There is a reason. to reduce the RISK of getting cancer. and she consented to the procedure.

No. The only thing this procedure guarantees is she can't get breast cancer because she no longer has breasts.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers
Exactly, since she no longer has breasts she can't get breast cancer but what about lung cancer,throat cancer, etc.
Why do the doctors draw the lion at the breasts?

You REALLY need to go educate yourself on this issue before you open your mouth here again.

In a thread full of ignorance and stupidity, yours may well be the stupidest post yet.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

No. The only thing this procedure guarantees is she can't get breast cancer because she no longer has breasts.

Ok, so she went from being high-risk to low-risk. I'm assuming she felt that was better than taking the chance. You can disagree with her, but you still haven't explained how this is malpractice.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: thecrecarc

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: warmodder

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: irishScott
No. Hippocratic oath: Do no harm.

Same reason assisted suicide is illegal in 49 states

She wasn't harmed though...

So if I ambushed her in an ally the day before the surgery, and cut off her breasts with a machete (think Rwanda), assuming she gets rushed to the hospital and survives without a hitch, did I harm her?

Same net result as her getting them removed... excluding emotional damage.

Um, she consented to the procedure. Why would it be malpractice? It's a legitimate preventative measure.

legitimate? i don't think so. she has a possiblity of getting cancer. it is not a gurenteed. to remove her breast is a huge mental and physical issue. not to mention that is no gurentee that she won't get cancer latter anyway.

they should have just kept closer eye on her. have regular visits to the doctor. to cut off part of the body for no reason is unethical.

There is a reason. to reduce the RISK of getting cancer. and she consented to the procedure.

No. The only thing this procedure guarantees is she can't get breast cancer because she no longer has breasts.

actually that is wrong also. removing the breast does not gurntee that a pwerson will not get breast cancer (there is small amount of "breast"). but it does greatly reduce the chance.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: MotionMan
It is neither unethical nor malpractice (i.e. medical negligence).

Removing the breasts of healthy women with a family history of breast cancer is an accepted practice.

BTW, I am a lawyer who use to specialize in medical malpractice (I am not giving legal advice here, however)

MotionMan, Esq.

Well i am sure it accepted. They get paid for it.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Deeko
I think people here are just reading into this wrong.

You can disagree with the decision. You can disagree with the advice. However, it is very clearly NOT malpractice.

I didn't say it was malpractice i asked if the doctors actions are ethical.

 

[KK]

couldn't the doctor remove the real hooters and put a fake set on?

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Deeko
I think people here are just reading into this wrong.

You can disagree with the decision. You can disagree with the advice. However, it is very clearly NOT malpractice.

I didn't say it was malpractice i asked if the doctors actions are ethical.

And the answer, very clearly, is YES.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Deeko
I think people here are just reading into this wrong.

You can disagree with the decision. You can disagree with the advice. However, it is very clearly NOT malpractice.

I didn't say it was malpractice i asked if the doctors actions are ethical.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought the title of the thread was "Medical malpractice?" My mistake.

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: Deeko
I think people here are just reading into this wrong.

You can disagree with the decision. You can disagree with the advice. However, it is very clearly NOT malpractice.

I didn't say it was malpractice i asked if the doctors actions are ethical.

Well, the title of this thread IS "Medical malpractice?".

MotionMan

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: MotionMan
It is neither unethical nor malpractice (i.e. medical negligence).

Removing the breasts of healthy women with a family history of breast cancer is an accepted practice.

BTW, I am a lawyer who use to specialize in medical malpractice (I am not giving legal advice here, however)

MotionMan, Esq.

Well i am sure it accepted. They get paid for it.

You really cannot be that ignorant or that closed-minded, can you?

MotionMan

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: bignateyk
LOL @ those of you who said malpractice. She consented to the procedure. She might have been the one to ask for it in the first place. It's not like she is the only person to have ever had this done. I think some of you need to read up on what malpractice actually is.

I asked you if it is ethical on the doctors part to agree to cut a perfectly healthy womans perfectly health breasts off of her because Maybe she may get cancer in her breasts in the future. And remember even after removing her breasts there is No guarantee that she will be cancer free.