"HUNG" Jury selected in penis amputation lawsuit

  • MusclFurPeX

    Posts: 166

    Aug 18, 2011 8:43 PM GMT

    “HUNG” Jury selected in penis amputation lawsuit
    Posted by CLE on Aug 18, ‘11 4:35 PM for everyone
    Jury selected in penis amputation lawsuit

    By BRUCE SCHREINER — The Associated Press

    Posted: 9:44am on Aug 18, 2011; Modified: 2:17pm on Aug 18, 2011

    Related Stories

    SHELBYVILLE, Ky. — Opening arguments will be heard Monday in the civil trial involving a Kentucky man who is suing a surgeon who amputated his penis four years ago.

    A jury was swiftly seated in a Shelbyville courtroom Thursday in the lawsuit filed by Phillip Seaton of nearby Waddy, and his wife, Deborah.

    They sued Dr. John Patterson of Louisville in 2008 for unspecified damages stemming from “loss of service, love and affection” after the surgeon removed Phillip Seaton’s penis during what the plaintiffs say was supposed to have been a circumcision to treat inflammation.

    Patterson maintains the amputation was necessary because he found cancer during the surgery.

    Seaton, sporting a long ponytail and gray beard, was seated at a table in the front of the courtroom alongside his attorney during jury selection.

    Shelby County Circuit Judge Charles Hickman instructed the jury not to discuss the case, and said the trial will begin Monday.

    Lawyers would not comment on the case because of Hickman’s instruction to refrain from making public statements.

    Kevin George, attorney for the Seatons, said in a 2008 Associated Press interview that the situation was not an emergency and, “It didn’t have to happen that way.”

    Clay Robinson, Patterson’s attorney, has previously said the urologist had permission to perform any medical procedure deemed necessary. Robinson has said that Patterson “had no reasonable option” but to remove the cancer.

    “Mr. Seaton’s problem was not the surgery, it was the cancer,” Robinson said in 2008.

    The Seatons also sued Jewish Hospital, where the surgery took place. The hospital settled for an undisclosed amount.
  • TheAlchemixt

    Posts: 2294

    Aug 19, 2011 1:41 AM GMT
    I'd love to sit on that bench!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 19, 2011 1:57 AM GMT
    He actually sued? I woulda remained silent, and simply killed the Dr.
    An amputated penis is not something that can be replaced with money.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 19, 2011 2:25 AM GMT
    I think the surgeon should have aborted his surgery right away, wait till the guy is awake and then discuss what the options are. Radiation, topical immunomodulators, localized chemo, limited surgery, etc...all possible options.

    It wasn't like as if he has to drill into a skull to get to where he would need to operate a second time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 19, 2011 2:40 AM GMT
    Yeah, there's just no reason the doctor couldn't have waited until the dude woke up to discuss the matter with him.
  • MusclFurPeX

    Posts: 166

    Aug 19, 2011 2:48 AM GMT


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 19, 2011 2:55 AM GMT
    It is possible that the penis was so disfigured that repair might be impossible. But the discussion before surgery would have brought up the possibility of cancer and resection. We're missing the urologist's notes, testimony of the urologist and patient, and pictures to understand the hung jury.

    Just for fun, google "penile cancer pics" and you'll see. icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 19, 2011 6:16 PM GMT
    Inflammation from infection and inflammation from cancer can look the same. What probably happened was that to get to tissue that's amenable to biopsy, the patient had to be under general anesthesia, and the surgeon sent biopsies to pathologic examination while the patient is on the OR table ("frozen section") and found that it was cancer.

    But, it begs the question of whether the possibility of cancer was raised in discussion with the patient PRIOR to the surgery, and what would be done about it if found.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Aug 19, 2011 6:17 PM GMT
    Don't they have to do a biopsy in order to determine the cancer and what stage it's in? This doctor acted irresponsibly. I would vote guilty.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 19, 2011 6:23 PM GMT
    No, they probably sent the whole thing to pathology where cancer was confirmed. Otherwise the lawsuit would have said: penis amputated WITHOUT cancer.

    But, again, the important point is that it is often impossible to tell just from physical exam or superficial biopsies whether it's penile cancer or not, hence the need for the OR.