FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) — A Kentucky man did not consent to have his penis amputated and the doctor who performed the surgery had options other than removing the organ, even though cancer had been found during a surgery, an attorney argued Tuesday to the Kentucky Court of Appeals. Kevin George, the lawyer for Phillip Seaton of Waddy, told the appeals panel that the medical waiver signed by his client contains extremely broad language and that Dr. John Patterson should have sought consent before removing the penis. “The point is … a patient has a right,” George said. “The doctor does not have the right to do whatever he wants, even if it turns out to be reasonable.” Judges Janet Stumbo and Donna Dixon took in the 30 minutes of arguments in Frankfort over whether a judge erred in the jury instructions and if the pre-surgery medical consent form was valid or the language in it proved to be too vague. Judge Michael Caperton missed the arguments. Stumbo said Caperton mistakenly went to Louisville for the case, but would listen to a recording of it later. Stumbo said a decision is expected in about two months. Patterson, a Kentucky-based urologist, maintains he found cancer in the man’s penis during surgery and that it had to be removed. The patient claims the surgery was supposed to be a circumcision and he never authorized the amputation, nor was he given a chance to seek a second opinion. The Seatons sued Patterson in Shelby County Circuit Court in 2008 after an operation that resulted in the amputation. Seaton, now in his 60s, was having the procedure on Oct. 19, 2007, to better treat inflammation.http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2012/09/11/kentucky-man-sues-doctor-for-amputating-his-penis/ |
Logged
