South Miami hospital sued for accidental circumcision on newborn

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,352
11
0
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMo...n-mistake-horrifying-mother/story?id=11626925

Eight days after her son was born and was still being cared for in the neonatal intensive care unit, Vera Delgado went home briefly to take a shower and change her clothes.

When she came back to South Miami Hospital, she found her baby, Mario Viera, had been circumcised –- by mistake.

Now, Delgado is suing the hospital, not for a medical mistake, but for assault and battery on her newborn. She is asking for $1 million for the "deformity" the circumcision caused.

"This is not medical malpractice," said her lawyer, Spencer Aronfeld. "We are suing for battery, an unauthorized assault on this baby. They took a knife to him without his parent's permission."

"The baby was in neonatal intensive care with complications from a birth-related infection," said her lawyer. "They took the baby out and amputated healthy tissue from the penis in an irreversible procedure."
I found the bolded part the most interesting. If this was a case of assult and battery, shouldn't there be a police investigation and criminal charges be filed against the appropriate parties?
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
8
0
Yea someone messed up and they are going to have to pay big.


I know when my son was born you had to tell several people that you wanted it after signing papers. But we only told 1 person no and that was it. She did say it was free now but would cost money later but my wife still passed.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
3
0
Not even $1 million will give that baby back his foreskin.

The real travesty though is that male genital mutilation is automatic in this country.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,945
122
106
Yea someone messed up and they are going to have to pay big.


I know when my son was born you had to tell several people that you wanted it after signing papers. But we only told 1 person no and that was it. She did say it was free now but would cost money later but my wife still passed.


No. You pay big. The next time YOU need medical service.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,158
6
81
Not even $1 million will give that baby back his foreskin.

The real travesty though is that male genital mutilation is automatic in this country.

The real travesty is smagma. Disgusting smagma.


The crust formed around ones dickhead when he is un-circumsized and un-clean. "Uncircumsized Dick Crud"

"The smagma on my dick wont come off its so dirty."


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=smagma
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
8
0
Not even $1 million will give that baby back his foreskin.

The real travesty though is that male genital mutilation is automatic in this country.


It is not automatic. I have a 1 1/2 year old son and we said no 1 time and that was it. But if you wanted it you had to say yes, that person went out and another comes in and ask again then has you sign the permission slips and then another person does it.
 

tinker2141

Previously Banned Chickenshit Jackass
Sep 10, 2010
113
0
0
The real travesty is smagma. Disgusting smagma.


The crust formed around ones dickhead when he is un-circumsized and un-clean. "Uncircumsized Dick Crud"

"The smagma on my dick wont come off its so dirty."


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=smagma

Ahaha. They saved that kid form years of teasing in the locker room. Oh well hope she enjoys the free ride her family is about to get. Imagine when they have to tell that kid his life of ease was earned through a mistake involving his pecker.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
I don't know about the assault and battery angle, that part doesn't make sense, but suing for medical malpractice makes perfect sense. The hospital did an unwanted and irreversible medical procedure on someone's child.....
 

surfsatwerk

Lifer
Mar 6, 2008
10,110
5
81
They both are removing of flesh. So by a generic answer yes they are the same.

But ability to live as well off with vs the other would be the differance.

I think the millions of men walking around who have been circumcised would not consider this to be true.

It's a fairly harmless cosmetic procedure. The kid isn't harmed, and no life altering damage is done.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
I think the millions of men walking around who have been circumcised would not consider this to be true.

It's a fairly harmless cosmetic procedure. The kid isn't harmed, and no life altering damage is done.

No life altering damage is done, but that's not for you or I to judge, it's up to the parents of the boy to decide. If it's important to them to have little junior look like his dad growing up, then that's up to the them to decide, and the bottom line is that the hospital performed an unwanted procedure. I just don't get the "assault & battery" angle.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,650
2,385
126
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMo...n-mistake-horrifying-mother/story?id=11626925


I found the bolded part the most interesting. If this was a case of assult and battery, shouldn't there be a police investigation and criminal charges be filed against the appropriate parties?

The lawyer in the article was referring to the civil tort known as battery. That is different than the crime. In civil law a battery is essentially an unconsented touching without privilege.

Probably a clear case of liability here-assuming no signed consent by either parent. The only real question is the amount of damages.

Medical people would know better than I, but in these days of reattaching fingers and thumbs, couldn't this be fixed by a bit of plastic surgery?