Double Masectomy Unnecessary! - page 2

Did any of you happen to see "The Today Show" this morning? They did an interview with a woman, and of course her lawyer, who had a double masectomy because she was told she had breast cancer. Then... Read More

  1. by   deespoohbear
    Did it say what hospital was responsible? I bet there will be some different policies going into place....

    Feel sorry for that woman and the suffering she has endured....and for the woman who was walking around for who knows how long thinking everything was okay. What a mess....
  2. by   mona b RN
    Amen NurseWeasel, I'm one of them. I made the decision for a double mastectomy because of my young age (was36 when diagnosed) and family hx. Did this woman go through chemo too?
    However, It is a major adjustment. I can't imagine hearing those words after having gone through a double mastectomy. Umm... it turns out that you don't have cancer after all. Man, I can't imagine! Although, it sure would have been nice to hear that I really didn't have cancer.

    mona b
  3. by   fab4fan
    Well, that's cold comfort...now she is also battling infection r/t the surgery.

    $250K...til you pay lawyer fees, taxes, etc., it's not even worth going to court. No, I don't think every case deserves a jackpot judgement, but this was an egregious error. Not only was she maimed, but the trauma of being told she has an aggressive CA, then...whoops, sorry, you're OK...I think there really need to be some consequences for this one.
  4. by   Q.
    It's hard for me to view being told you have CA, and then being told you're healthy as "traumatic." Mastectomy aside.
    My mother and my deceased father in law, as well as the rest of us, would have loved to have heard those words. In fact, many, many, many times we prayed for just that....a mistake.
  5. by   OzNurse69
    Originally posted by Susy K
    It's hard for me to view being told you have CA, and then being told you're healthy as "traumatic." Mastectomy aside.
    With you on that one Susy. Stressful, yes. A big relief, definitely. But at least she is still alive. Far better off, in my opinion, than the lady who was told her tests were clear, then found out later that she had Ca -- like others have said, is there any word about what happened to her??

    (BTW Susy, poor little Fatty -- how cruel!! He'll be scarred for life now, having that picture posted all over the world!!!)
  6. by   OBNURSEHEATHER
    Yeah, sure. It's better to NOT have cancer after being told that you do than vice versa. But the point is that such gross errors occur at all. The fact that they hold our lives in their hands, and nothing more difinitive in the way of testing is done before they hall her into surgery and cut her breasts off.

    Can you imagine the torment she went through, the decisions she had to make, the horrible surgery and recovery, along with the emotional aspects of cancer, death, and self image she confronted?

    Mastectomy aside, it's still a horrible thing that isn't lessened any in my eyes by the fact that she's not dying.

    Heather
  7. by   sunnygirl272
    Originally posted by Susy K
    I'm torn about this. In a way, the malpractice suits in today's society are out of control. Take a look at Nevada's trauma surgeons/obstetricians to see just what this effect can have. Then again, what happened to this woman is horrible. But really, can a price be put on her suffering? Is the dollar amount really going to make it all better?

    If it were me, I'd want compensation for lost wages and pain/suffering, and I guess $250K might be alright. Because really, in the grand scheme of things, $250K or $250mil are NOT going to reverse what happened to me. I'd be more concerned that this doesn't happen again rather than getting a bigger check.
    [font=courier]
    i too have mixed feelings... but bear in mind that $250,000 has to cover lifelong expenses related to whatever screwup was made...

    Last edit by sunnygirl272 on Jan 20, '03
  8. by   howie122832
    originally posted by susanmary
    what about the woman who actually had the cancer & ended up putting off treatment as she was not diagnosed? did they cover this on the show? what a horrible story...








    that was my thought exactly!!! but i do feel for this woman, and i don't think 250,000.00 is even a drop in the bucket for this screw-up!
  9. by   sjoe
    Why is anyone surprised in the least? Lab personnel, etc. are often every bit as rushed and overloaded with work as are RNs. Of course, mistakes will be made, as they are made in every human activitiy, and more mistakes the more overworked people are.

    Since no one pointed it out, the $250,000 cap (which California already has) proposed by Bush, is in addition to all medical costs. This cap is for what used to be called "pain and suffering." A quarter of a million dollars is ample, IMHO, for anyone's pain and suffering.
  10. by   sunnygirl272
    Originally posted by sjoe
    Why is anyone surprised in the least? Lab personnel, etc. are often every bit as rushed and overloaded with work as are RNs. Of course, mistakes will be made, as they are made in every human activitiy, and more mistakes the more overworked people are.

    Since no one pointed it out, the $250,000 cap (which California already has) proposed by Bush, is in addition to all medical costs. This cap is for what used to be called "pain and suffering." A quarter of a million dollars is ample, IMHO, for anyone's pain and suffering.
    my understanding was that it was for lifelong medical expenses as well as pain and suffering.....i am not doubting you in the least, but do you have a link handy?
  11. by   sunnygirl272
    Originally posted by sunnygirl272
    my understanding was that it was for lifelong medical expenses as well as pain and suffering.....i am not doubting you in the least, but do you have a link handy?
    i stand corrected...
    here is what i found:
    >>limit to three years the period in which a plaintiff may file a healthcare liability action to ensure that claims are brought in a timely manner, i.e. while evidence and witnesses are available.
    >>allocate damages fairly, in proportion to a party's degree of fault;
    >>allow patients to recover economic damages, such as future medical expenses and loss of future earnings, while capping non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, at $250,000;
    >>place reasonable limits on punitive damages (i.e., the greater of two times the amount of economic damages awarded or $250,000.)
  12. by   BeachNurse
    This is not a surprising thing to happen. However, a mistake, a HUGE one was made. Yes, I'm sure she is glad that she doesn't have CA, but it's hard to be completely "happy" with that when you have needlessly had both breasts removed. I am of the thought that IF $250, 000 will not cover her expenses then she should get more.
  13. by   fab4fan
    In that case, a man who undergoes a bil. orchiectomy for test. CA, and then is told, "Oops, you don't have cancer...nevermind", should be glad he doesn't have CA...and his wife should be happy, too.

close