IIRC, I got them at the local DIY emporium - which is probably a couple of time zones away from you.
But you can find them at Jeff’s bric-a-brac bazaar:
https://www.amazon.com/Barbuzzo-Branding-Iron-Changeable-Letters/dp/B004M5IS9E
2 Likes
What bothers is that apparently everyone on the surgical team was aware of this and no-one said anything. If I have surgery, I’m going to insist on having the whole thing on videotape.
2 Likes
I could see a very elaborate prank to pull on medical students here.
1 Like
This reminds me of Scrubs where Turk stitches his initials onto JD after some surgery (i forget what it was specifically). Tried finding a clip of it but i have been foiled by Youtube
1 Like
This has nothing to do with being “entitled” or feelings. A surgeon has ethical and legal obligations and carving his initials onto a patient without their consent is a breech of trust and factually illegal. There are no feelings about facts.
7 Likes
So can I bring up Liver Eatin’ Johnson?
1 Like
Don’t try to understand ‘em.
1 Like
I’m not certain how wrong this is, really. It is most definitely not an assault causing bodily harm.
I understand that the “idea” of this is distressing, as one couldn’t possibly be more vulnerable when they are unconscious on an operating table with their body cut open.
Is this unprofessional? I’d say yes.
Is this ethically questionable? I’d say yes.
Is this an unforgivable, reprehensible act that requires criminal prosecution? I’d say no.
1 Like
I would say yes, it is an unauthorized medical procedure however minor it is. Should a person have any complications due to the surgeon burning his initials on them the surgeon and the hospital are liable.
7 Likes
Um, shouldn’t it be the donor’s initials?
2 Likes
The thing is, is that this device is used to “sketch a non-harmful outline on the liver’s surface.” If making these cosmetic markings on the liver’s surface is considered “non-harmful” as far as liver function goes, then even making them for no practical reason would still be non-harmful as far as liver functioning goes.
It is still an unauthorized procedure is my point, no matter how minor. And even minor non-harmful procedures carry some percentage of risk. People die getting their tonsils out, people fall into comas from minor anesthetics, people have severe reactions to procedures to extremely low risk. No matter how risky it is or not its still malpractice. It doesn’t need to result in the death of someone for it to be taken seriously.
7 Likes
Strictly speaking they aren’t lasers. They’re very small ion torches. The gas serves as a conductor delivering electric current to cauterize the tissue. There supposed to be used for staunching internal bleeding.
That’s another point of harm done here. Assholes like this doctor reduce trust in medical professionals and thus the willingness of people to get needed care. Many people are already nervous about being under general anesthetic without shit like this.
8 Likes
Seems like i need to take people to task:
Informed consent
If the patient does not give informed consent to a medical procedure, the doctor or health care provider may be liable if the procedure results in harm or injury, even if it was carried out perfectly.
4 Likes
I was vaguely aware of that abusive practice from some other article I can’t remember where. However, that particular author, after correctly identifying the problem, uses it as an excuse to go on an asinine screed about the moral degeneracy of modern society and how much better it was before the New Deal. I want to be clear that I’m liking that you brought the relevant topic itself into the discussion, and not that article itself.
3 Likes
Except, and this is pedantic because all legal maters are pedantic, what he did isn’t a “procedure” but a part of a procedure that is already authorized.
Sure, but he deviated from what was discussed and authorized by the patient and therefore still did not have explicit and informed consent
4 Likes
Erm, yup, you’re not wrong.
I’m pretty sure I read about it here on BB but either I suck at using the local search engine, or the search engine sucks, or I’m mistaken about where I read about the practice.
No doubt there’s better coverage on this problem, I just can’t quickly find it.
3 Likes
There are any number of harmless pranks that could be played with your unconscious body, and without some kind of proof you’d be hard pressed to claim damages in court. Damage isn’t the point, the point is that the doctor was granted very narrow permissions to get inside that body, and they took liberties that weren’t discussed beforehand.
This is a Very Bad thing to let slide.
6 Likes
I really had no idea there was a law about such things primarily because I never could imagine someone doing such. My comment was silly because I thought the whole thing silly. Sometimes my own ignorance surprises me. I’m sorry for my oversight.
2 Likes
