Baby circumcised against parents' wishes = lawsuit??

[Laila619]

What do you think of this story that happened in Miami recently?

http://cbs4.com/local/South.Miami.Baby.2.1907271.html
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100912081521zzzz.nb/topstory.html

The short story: a baby boy was wrongfully circumcised by a Miami hospital after the hospital mistakenly read the consent form. The parents are very upset and are suing the hospital. It's a family tradition that every male in their family is uncirc'd. The family's attorney will file a lawsuit against the hospital for battery. Attorney Spencer Aronfeld says: "A multi-million dollar lawsuit will be filed against the hospital and doctors who performed the irreversible amputation of this helpless baby's functioning tissue. We take the position that the procedure constitutes more than just medical malpractice, it is a battery and a human rights violation with lifelong consequences." The hospital has issued multiple apologies to the family.

Do you agree with the multi-million dollar lawsuit? Is this just another example of how sue happy we are? Or is it totally justified?

 

[Imdanny]

Well, wow. This discussion could go in so many different directions.

You seem to be saying you don't think they should be able to sue (or something like that).

They didn't want their child circumstanced. Their child was circumcised.

I don't know anything about the law but I think they have a right to be angry.

 

[davi_el_mejor]

I would be absolutely livid if this happened to my child!

Call me sue-happy if you like, but this is something I would definitely sue over. And for millions of dollars.

 

[Laila619]

Well, wow. This discussion could go in so many different directions.

You seem to be saying you don't think they should be able to sue (or something like that).

Not at all Danny. I'm not sure what I think yet. I know I'd be pissed, but not sure what steps I would take.

 

[chemgirl]

I am really on the fence about circumcision, but FI has some VERY VERY strong feelings against it. While I don't see it as abuse, I would be angry with any procedure being performed on my child without my consent. My FI on the other hand fully considers it abuse. I do think he would try criminal prosecution before a civil suit though (I don't think it would work, but to him its abuse and a criminal matter).

 

[dragonfly411]

Hmmm. I'd be pissed for sure. I think suing for surgical malpractice is reasonable. Suing for battery not so much. It was a mistake, they didn't intentionally go out to harm the child and harm the parents' wishes. I think that's where I'd probably stand on it. The hard part about this is that the damage is irreversible.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Yes, to suing. I would guess that the multi-million dollars if more a fabrication of plaintiffs' attorney's wishful thinking, than a likely result of the case.

 

[Autumnovember]

I would probably sue as well although not for battery.

Mistakes do happen, and doctors pay hundreds and thousands of dollars for insurance for those exact purposes.

Several radiologists I work with told me the amount of money they pay for insurance incase they were to be sued, lets just say they pay a lot.

 

[Imdanny]

I have very strong feelings about male circumcision. I hate it.

It was done to me and I hate it. I don't agree with it and I don't think it should be done to anyone.

My comments aren't meant to offend or upset anyone who feels differently but this is how I feel.

 

[Autumnovember]

I have very strong feelings about male circumcision. I hate it.

It was done to me and I hate it. I don't agree with it and I don't think it should be done to anyone.

My comments aren't meant to offend or upset anyone who feels differently but this is how I feel.

I feel the exact opposite.

 

[Laila619]

I think suing for surgical malpractice is reasonable. Suing for battery not so much.

I agree with this dragonfly. It's the battery and the 'lifelong consequences' which I feel are a bit extreme. There's no doubt I would be horribly upset though if something were done to my baby without my consent.

 

[Imdanny]

In any case it's the decision of the parents. The hospital made a mistake.

 

[Irishgrrrl]

I think suing for surgical malpractice is reasonable. Suing for battery not so much.

I agree with this dragonfly.

As do I. I think Dragonfly hit the nail on the head when she used the word "intentionally" in her previous post. To me, the whole thing hinges on intent. This was a mistake (i.e. malpractice), not a willful act of battery. Yes, it's awful that this happened and I definitely think the parents would be well within their rights to sue, but I don't think this rises to the level of a criminal act. A malpractice suit would absolutely be appropriate here, but battery? I don't think so.

 

[Autumnovember]

I think suing for surgical malpractice is reasonable. Suing for battery not so much.

I agree with this dragonfly.

As do I. I think Dragonfly hit the nail on the head when she used the word "intentionally" in her previous post. To me, the whole thing hinges on intent. This was a mistake (i.e. malpractice), not a willful act of battery. Yes, it's awful that this happened and I definitely think the parents would be well within their rights to sue, but I don't think this rises to the level of a criminal act. A malpractice suit would absolutely be appropriate here, but battery? I don't think so.

Agreed completely. Let's be realistic...what happened was wrong and it really is a shame since this was a tradition the family followed. Is it going to change the baby psychologically growing up? Is it going to directly affect the babies life in the present time and in the future?

Probably not.

 

[Kaleigh]

Malpractice yes. Battery no... Wondering what the precident is for this?? I am sure this has happened before.

The hospital made an unfortunate mistake, but there wasn't intent...

I feel badly for the parents and their baby boy.

 

[kenny]

What do you think of this story that happened in Miami recently?

http://cbs4.com/local/South.Miami.Baby.2.1907271.html
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100912081521zzzz.nb/topstory.html

The short story: a baby boy was wrongfully circumcised by a Miami hospital after the hospital mistakenly read the consent form. The parents are very upset and are suing the hospital. It's a family tradition that every male in their family is uncirc'd. The family's attorney will file a lawsuit against the hospital for battery. Attorney Spencer Aronfeld says: "A multi-million dollar lawsuit will be filed against the hospital and doctors who performed the irreversible amputation of this helpless baby's functioning tissue. We take the position that the procedure constitutes more than just medical malpractice, it is a battery and a human rights violation with lifelong consequences." The hospital has issued multiple apologies to the family.

Do you agree with the multi-million dollar lawsuit? Is this just another example of how sue happy we are? Or is it totally justified?

I would get those dollar signs out of my eyes and accept the hospital's apology.

My money comes from working.

 

[Autumnovember]

What do you think of this story that happened in Miami recently?

http://cbs4.com/local/South.Miami.Baby.2.1907271.html
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100912081521zzzz.nb/topstory.html

The short story: a baby boy was wrongfully circumcised by a Miami hospital after the hospital mistakenly read the consent form. The parents are very upset and are suing the hospital. It's a family tradition that every male in their family is uncirc'd. The family's attorney will file a lawsuit against the hospital for battery. Attorney Spencer Aronfeld says: "A multi-million dollar lawsuit will be filed against the hospital and doctors who performed the irreversible amputation of this helpless baby's functioning tissue. We take the position that the procedure constitutes more than just medical malpractice, it is a battery and a human rights violation with lifelong consequences." The hospital has issued multiple apologies to the family.

Do you agree with the multi-million dollar lawsuit? Is this just another example of how sue happy we are? Or is it totally justified?

I would get those dollar signs out of my eyes and accept the hospital's apology.

My money comes from working.

I respect this a lot.


Except, I have question.

Does the same apply if you were involved in an accident that was not your fault and you suffered physical injuries?

 

[davi_el_mejor]

What if they misread a do not resuscitate form? Or amputated the wrong limb? It boils down to being lazy, and a lazy surgeon is by far one of the scariest things I could imagine.

It is a disfiguring accident. If female circumcision were legal in the US, and your daughter was accidentally circumcised because someone misread a consent form would it still be malpractice?

 

[dragonfly411]

hmmm. Good points Autumn and Davi.

ETA - I think that there should be some repercussion. A driver in a car accident would still have to face legal fines, even if you were to let it go. The surgeon or EMT or whomever that mis-read a do not resuscitate would still have to face those legal repercussions as well. I don't think a simple apology is sufficient. Whoever read it wrong, and performed the practice should have to face some sort of repercussion in my opinion FOR the laziness.

That being said, I still don't think it would qualify as battery, and I think that lawyer is going to probably get a talking to from a judge about that charge.

 

[Autumnovember]

What if they misread a do not resuscitate form? Or amputated the wrong limb? It boils down to being lazy, and a lazy surgeon is by far one of the scariest things I could imagine.

It is a disfiguring accident. If female circumcision were legal in the US, and your daughter was accidentally circumcised because someone misread a consent form would it still be malpractice?

Wait a sec...performing a circumcision takes effort & work.

I totally disagree that it boils down to laziness.

 

[dragonfly411]

autumn - To me it would be laziness in job ethic. They didn't take the time to thoroughly read the paperwork. They glazed over and went ahead with the procedure.

 

[Loves Vintage]

Failure to obtain a patient's informed consent to a surgical procedure can give rise to a claim for battery. The doctor must inform the patient of the risks associated with a particular procedure and obtain patient's consent in advance. Plaintiff here specifically declined the procedure and did not consent, which is why the claim will be for battery . . . as well as negligence, failure to obtain consent, etc. etc.

I have no moral objections to suing the hospital. If no one ever sued, hospitals would not have much incentive to correct their practices. If all the hospital has to do is issue an apology, then they'd be performing procedures without consent all the time or otherwise behaving outside of the standard of care, and then, err, apologizing later. Not what I'm looking for in terms of the quality of my own medical treatment.

 

[kenny]

Last I checked circumcised men could still work for a living.

Sh!t happens.
No biggie.

 

[davi_el_mejor]

What if they misread a do not resuscitate form? Or amputated the wrong limb? It boils down to being lazy, and a lazy surgeon is by far one of the scariest things I could imagine.

It is a disfiguring accident. If female circumcision were legal in the US, and your daughter was accidentally circumcised because someone misread a consent form would it still be malpractice?

Wait a sec...performing a circumcision takes effort & work.

I totally disagree that it boils down to laziness.

The laziness comes from not doing the proper pre-surgical prep. Like reading a consent form.

 

[Trekkie]

What do you think of this story that happened in Miami recently?

http://cbs4.com/local/South.Miami.Baby.2.1907271.html
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100912081521zzzz.nb/topstory.html

The short story: a baby boy was wrongfully circumcised by a Miami hospital after the hospital mistakenly read the consent form. The parents are very upset and are suing the hospital. It's a family tradition that every male in their family is uncirc'd. The family's attorney will file a lawsuit against the hospital for battery. Attorney Spencer Aronfeld says: "A multi-million dollar lawsuit will be filed against the hospital and doctors who performed the irreversible amputation of this helpless baby's functioning tissue. We take the position that the procedure constitutes more than just medical malpractice, it is a battery and a human rights violation with lifelong consequences." The hospital has issued multiple apologies to the family.

Do you agree with the multi-million dollar lawsuit? Is this just another example of how sue happy we are? Or is it totally justified?

I would get those dollar signs out of my eyes and accept the hospital's apology.

My money comes from working.

+1

I also agree with Kaleigh and several other posters who said that this was malpractice, not battery.

Personally, I prefer circumcised men. This is partly cultural. I was raised in a part of the country where you are not regarded as a man until you have gone to 'the bush' for initiation and circumcision. Until then, you can't take a wife. Sounds old fashioned, I know!

Also, and yes, this may be TMI, but I always say you can't eat a lollipop with its wrapper on!

 

[davi_el_mejor]

Last I checked circumcised men could still work for a living.

Sh!t happens.

Wow.

 

[Autumnovember]

Last I checked circumcised men could still work for a living.

Sh!t happens.
No biggie.

Agreed.

 

[lucyandroger]

Not to get all lawerly on you guys talking about there not being intent...but...to prove battery, you do not have to prove intent to actually cause harm or injury but rather you must prove intent to commit the act. Even though the doctor did not intend to harm the baby, he did intend to perform the circumcision.

Doctors are often sued for battery when they perform a procedure for which they were not given consent.

ETA - Q for those saying it is not battery...what's your reasoning? Battery has a legal definition - in general in the US, though the definition varies from state-to-state, battery is intentional and unpermitted physical contact that causes harm or offense.

 

[kenny]

Last I checked circumcised men could still work for a living.

Sh!t happens.

Wow.

AFAIC, this is just not that big of a deal.
Some guys are cut, some not.
Both get along fine.
It is not like they took out the GOOD kidney.

Today's expectation of perfect safety and perfectly perfect perfection in every way is downright creepy.

 

[LadyBlue]

Failure to obtain a patient's informed consent to a surgical procedure can give rise to a claim for battery. The doctor must inform the patient of the risks associated with a particular procedure and obtain patient's consent in advance. Plaintiff here specifically declined the procedure and did not consent, which is why the claim will be for battery . . . as well as negligence, failure to obtain consent, etc. etc.

I have no moral objections to suing the hospital. If no one ever sued, hospitals would not have much incentive to correct their practices. If all the hospital has to do is issue an apology, then they'd be performing procedures without consent all the time or otherwise behaving outside of the standard of care, and then, err, apologizing later. Not what I'm looking for in terms of the quality of my own medical treatment.

Totally agree with you.