A US man has taken a doctor to court after he surgically removed his entire penis, allegedly without consent, during a routine circumcision. Phillip Seaton, 64, woke up at the Jewish Hospital following the circumcision on 9 October 2007 to find his penis completely gone. Mr Seaton, a lorry driver from Shelbyville, Kentucky, had undergone the circumcision to treat an inflammation problem. His surgeon, John Patterson, said the amputation was necessary because he discovered a rare and deadly form of penile cancer while performing the operation. Lab tests later proved that he had a cancer known as squamous cell carcinoma. But Mr Seaton’s lawyer Kevin George maintained the situation was not an emergency, and the family should have been allowed to get a second opinion. Mr George told the court: “He's angry because Dr Patterson took off his penis without asking; without giving him a choice; without giving him the opportunity to check around and talk to other people.” In court, the patient told jurors of the initial moment after being told his penis had been removed. “I pulled the dressing down, and I didn't see nothing. Then I came out of the restroom and I said I'm getting the hell out of this damn hospital.” Now Mr Seaton and his wife, Deborah, are seeking unspecified damages from John Patterson for “loss of service, love and affection”. Mr Seaton has already sued the hospital, receiving an undisclosed amount of damages in an out-of-court settlement. A civil trial against Dr John Patterson is currently underway. Dr Patterson, a urologist, defended himself in Shelby County Circuit Court. “What I saw was not a penis. What I saw was cancer,” he said on Monday. According to Dr Patterson’s lawyer Clay Robinson, another doctor later removed the rest of the organ. He also contends that Mr Seaton had signed a document authorising necessary treatment in unforseen circumstances. “Mr Seaton is here today, able to be in this courtroom... because John Patterson saved his life,” Robinson argued. The court case continues.
that is what happens when doctors try to do the logical thing.... can't save someone's life without being sued in the end.....
well that sucked.. he should have been able to consent to it, but he probably would have ended up agreeing with the doctor.
At least he lives. Dont even know if he wanted this to be on the news... 1) If so, people should know this hospital is a nono.. but knows he has no penis. 2) If not, hospital rep is still there, no one knows about having no penis
tbh i find it hard to imagine life with my manhood cut off, i wonder if he still feels like a man, i would sue the doc too, i would want to be told and make the decision, the dude probably would have just sat it out and died with his manhood intact or had it cut off, his choice. Where is his penis now? doc probably has it in a jar in his basement. atleast his voice hasnt gone squeaky but thats a ballz issue.
Guys the guy is 64 years old. Some elders don't put as much importance on their lives, as they figured they don't have long to live anyways. The doctor did the right thing as his oath states, however I do believe he should have been given consent prior to making such a major amputation.
even if he was 20 years old some wouldn't want to live without their penis! Thats fucking insane what if he had like months to live with a penis or several years without, he's 64 a few months with a penis is better than living in misery the rest of your life. That doctor definitely needs to be sued.
but then imagine if it was removed when your 20....living another 50 years or so without your penis dang...
[video=youtube;uQyIqTYG72c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQyIqTYG72c[/video] reminds me of this but the doctor did it!
consent to operate under the discussed terms..... he did not automatically agree to have things amputated......
