If you're anything like me, you tend to get nervous even when going into the doctor's office for a routine check-up. There's something about the clinical environment, the harsh lighting, and the (slim) possibility that the doctors will discover that I have some rare, incurable illness that gives me the creeps. I tend to put off going to the doctor for as long as possible, and when I do finally make an appointment, I'm filled with profound dread until the day of my appointment arrives.
One man from the United Kingdom had the misfortune of going in for a routine medical procedure and coming out, well, altered. And not at all in the way he was expecting. Keep scrolling to find out what happens when the medical professionals we entrust with our lives get something horribly wrong, and how shockingly common this occurs.
FYI, this may not be a good one to read on your phone in the waiting room of your doctor's office.
A excerpt from one of my many vintage books...The uncircumcised boy who must take the above described care of his person every time he takes a bath, is very likely--through curiosity or idle experiment, or perhaps even through the influence of some suggestive remark or story that he has heard from other boys, to drift into or be lead in to the habit of playing with his organ as he takes his bath...
...which leads to playing with his organ when he is NOT taking his bath which increases the frequency of playing with his organ which ultimately leads to blindness... ?
A excerpt from one of my many vintage books, this one called "The Intimate Life" copyright 1926. I have earlier medical advisors from the late 1800s that all have chapters on the dangers of masturbation. In the 1920s bathing and hygiene became paramount and the fear was that the bathing of the member would start a boy down the path of 'self-abuse'. Read the excerpt below to get an idea of the mentality of that era.
" In this connection one of the problems that the mother must solve is the problem of cleanliness in a previous paragraph it was stated that every boy my well be circumcised. If he has not been circumcised, then the problem of cleanliness may be a rather difficult one. In bathing the uncircumcised boy the foreskin must be pushed back far enough to expose the whole head of the organ. This exposed head of the organ must then be gently but thoroughly cleanse with soap and water. This must be done at least once a week, preferably 2 or 3 times a week, as long as the individual lives if he is not circumcised. When the boy begins to bathe himself he will, of course attend to that matter in the same way in which his mother has done it.
It is not difficult to see that this cleansing operation is not at all an easy thing for her eight- or ten- year old boy. It should be very easy to convince a mother who has had an experience of this kind with her boy that boys should be circumcised .
There is another phase of this matter. The uncircumcised boy who must take the above described care of his person every time he takes a bath, is very likely--through curiosity or idle experiment, or perhaps even through the influence of some suggestive remark or story that he has heard from other boys, to drift into or be lead in to the habit of playing with his organ as he takes his bath. Thousands of boys have been led into the habit of self-abuse in that way they would not have had that difficulty if they had been circumcised in infancy. Surely all the arguments set forth above should convince the parent that every man child should be circumcised."
I am not doubting you found that some book somewhere, I am just stating a HISTORICAL FACT that boys were being circumcised in America long before there were even formal medical education programs in the US and elective circumcisions are NOT unique to the USA.
But for you to say that an article like that was the start of all circumcisions in the US, jeez...there is no shred of truth to that whatsoever.
Insurance covers the procedure because there are some health benefits to male circumcision.
Sounds like that doctor got a little snippy with the wrong patient.
*sorry, I couldn't help myself*
I know that the point of this forum was to discuss medical error and wrong-patient surgery ? and not the merits of circumcision, but since we're on the subject...........
From a global health perspective, both the CDC and the WHO recommend circumcision to prevent the spread of STIs including HIV. To be fair, the studies that these recommendations were based on were performed in sub-Saharan Africa, so I don't know what the validity or usefulness would be in a higher-income country like the US where we have improved access to and greater acceptance of barrier methods like condoms. Still, it's food for thought.
Even before a time-out, I think that some of the newer surgical guidelines include having a patient be site-marked while alert and awake. Granted, I don't know about site marking a cystoscopy.
Specializes in Surgical, Home Infusions, HVU, PCU, Neuro.
24 minutes ago, CalicoKitty said:
Even before a time-out, I think that some of the newer surgical guidelines include having a patient be site-marked while alert and awake. Granted, I don't know about site marking a cystoscopy.
I'm not positive but I don't think it would be completed with a ring around it........
Medical mistakes happen every day. Even to the best of the best. Perhaps, speaking out loud to the team/patient could help prevent some of them, such as "I am going to perform [insert procedure] on [insert patient's name, DOB, MRN]"
Specializes in Nurse Leader specializing in Labor & Delivery.
1 hour ago, jsm1917 said:
Medical mistakes happen every day. Even to the best of the best. Perhaps, speaking out loud to the team/patient could help prevent some of them, such as "I am going to perform [insert procedure] on [insert patient's name, DOB, MRN]"
That's called Universal Protocol, and that's what's supposed to happen, every single time.
Also, I don't work for Vanderbilt, but could we put a moratorium on dragging them? They've got it tough enough already ?.
They will have it tough enough when top heads (figuratively) roll for blatantly lying and scheming and covering up a patient's death to avoid proper reporting and investigation of said death and then getting one of their law school affiliates/associates (who just so happens to be the DA) to take the heat off of them by criminally prosecuting one aspect of their overall disgusting dysfunction.
Cowboyardee
472 Posts
Sounds like that doctor got a little snippy with the wrong patient.
*sorry, I couldn't help myself*