Man Sues Over Genital Amputation
 

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) - A Kentucky man who claims his penis was removed without his consent during what was supposed to be a circumcision has sued the doctor who performed the surgery.
pic of Genital Amputation

Phillip Seaton, 61, and his wife are seeking unspecified compensation from Dr. John M. Patterson and the medical practice that performed the circumcision for "loss of service, love and affection." The Seatons also are seeking unspecified punitive damages from Patterson and the medical practice, Commonwealth Urology.

A woman who answered the phone at Commonwealth Urology would not take a message for the doctor Thursday. But the Seaton's attorney said the doctor's post-surgical notes show the doctor thought he detected cancer and removed the penis. Attorney Kevin George said a later test did detect cancer.

I'd rather be dead if I didn't have the big balboski

why is 61 yr old getting circumcised?

fucked off in any case tho

im thinking the wife

He can still get it up looking at that old wrinkled pancake? Well, I guess we will never know now huh...

Damn that has to suck

only in Kentucky

As well he should.

"thought" he detected cancer??
Sounds like they should have just done the circumcision, and then a lot more tests before amputation!

Attorney Kevin George said a later test did detect cancer.

But I would still like to have been woken up and asked first ... a few hours won't make a difference.

Why the fuck would anyone get circumcised much less a 61 year old man?

I'd rip peoples heads off if that happened to me.

Tired of the ant-eater look.

hahaha :1orglaugh

I'll donate a few inches. Reminds me of the chinese VD joke, chinese doctor says
"no you don't have to amputate, dick will fall off all by itself in 2 weeks"

That man can't possibly sue them for ENOUGH.

Tort Reform NOW! hahahahaha

I wouldn't mind that...

That is completely fucked up.

Why does he even need a dick at 61

is he considered the second lady of the house :Oh crap :helpme :1orglaugh

Considering his age the most likely reason was balanitis. Chances are the man in question was overweight, had diabetes type 2, and waited too long before visiting a physician. By the time he finally did visit a physician it was too late to resolve the issue without surgery.

It was not a routine circumcision, since they'd probably have used local instead of full anesthesia for that and possible cancer would have gone unnoticed with a simple procedure like that.

So the patient's dick was almost certainly an inflamed, infected mess, the patient himself wasn't in great health, the surgeon was performing a non-standard circumcision and there probably was a suspicion that more might be wrong. When he did find something, it almost certainly wasn't something small that could have been removed by less drastic means.

Of course, the surgeon still should have informed the patient and gotten his consent before the amputation. Not for medical reasons (it's quite possible that he saved the patient's life), but to cover his own ass.

The most likely scenario might have been that decayed tissue may have been found once the surgeon began performing the procedure.

Instead of leaving the damaged tissue exposed, the doctor then made the decision to amputate the diseased organ to save time and to prevent further spread of the infection (which would have been exacerbated by the removal of the foreskin).

The case will not go very far once the doctor presents his finding to a medical tribunal and they back his decision.

Or maybe it was squamous cell carcinoma which at first was thought to be lesions caused by severe but standard balanitis. During surgery, the physician may have found subcutaneous lesions which convinced him that the only course of action was excision.

Either way, I think we can safely say that the media once again managed to turn what may well have been a sound medical decision into a medical horror story.

And for those who say "but nothing warrants cutting off a dick!":


Squamous cell carcinoma of the foot, now imagine having that below the skin on your dick.


DO NOT LOOK IF YOU ARE SQUEAMISH



























http://missinglink.ucsf.edu/lm/Derma...rcinoma-12.jpg

A note to those who just lost their lunch: it could be worse. I could have posted a picture of the same thing on a penis, instead.

Indeed...:thumbsup

sucks to be him