Finally the loss of a penis is being evaluated properly by the justice system. While many of us here might not care about losing their dick, I think we can realize that a guy who loses his involuntarily or has it otherwise mutilated is going to have issues with identity, confidence, and intimacy for his entire life.

I think it would also be interesting for the kid to sue his parents, now that the issue of whether childhood circumcision is under question. They are the ones who risked his penis, and such lawsuits could really put a damper on circumcision since there is resistance to outright legislating against it -- it's the American way to use lawsuits to bring about changes in safety and rights.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/ar ... 523cb81732 d8109017db35.7b1

US judge awards payout for botched circumcision

LOS ANGELES — A US judge on Monday approved a $4.6 million compensation payment for a boy who had the end of his penis removed in a botched circumcision shortly after birth.

The boy, who is now eight, underwent the operation when he was week-old baby in January 2003 at the Maternity Center of Vermont in Los Angeles, and still needs counseling to deal with the trauma, court papers said.

Surgeon Anthony Pickett used a clamp for the routine operation to remove the boy's foreskin, but mistakenly cut off the top of the penis due to the faulty design of a clamp used during the procedure.

"Because of the defective design of the circumcision clamp, there was no protection for the head of the penis and Dr. Pickett was unable to visualize the (head) when excising the foreskin," said the plaintiff's court papers.

"For this reason, an amputation to the (head) of plaintiff's penis occurred," added the lawsuit, brought against the clamp's manufacturer Miltex Inc. and its parent company, Integra Life Sciences Holding Corp.

The boy, who now lives with his family in Texas, will need annual visits to a pediatric urologist and will continue to obtain psychiatric care "to deal with the trauma of this incident and resultant surgeries," his lawyer said.

"In addition, future surgery may be required as he grows older," he added.

Of the $4.6 million payout approved by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rex Heeseman, $3.07 million will be paid to the boy's family, after lawyers' fees and costs are deducted.

Being familiar with surgical procedures, it dumbfounds me that the surgeon didn't immediately reattach the glans tip. Nerves might have been difficult to reattach, but in an infant, the nerves could have/would have regrown into the glans. Just utterly unbelievable. I haven't read the complete story and I don't know the details, circumstances might have involved the glans and it might have been unretrivable or seriously compromised, but something doesn't sound right. Incompetence seems to have been at play.

Maybe, because it says he couldn't visualize the head when excising the foreskin, he disposed of the foreskin and head together unknowningly, due to the faulty clamp and only discovered the accident later when it was to late to reattach the penis tip.

Sadly, it reminds me so much of David Reimer, whose entire penis was destroyed by a botched circumcision, then his life was further destroyed by Dr. John Money, in his attempts to prove his invalid thesis.

Caith721 (imported) wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:51 pm Sadly, it reminds me so much of David Reimer, whose entire penis was destroyed by a botched circumcision, then his life was further destroyed by Dr. John Money, in his attempts to prove his invalid thesis.

David did suffer death by suicide but years before his "normal" twin brother did the same.

He does represent clinicians behaving outside the known facts. That sexual identity is prenatal, not ornamental.

I wonder how this judgement compares to other accidental penectomy judgements such as Vanderbilt surgeons misreading

penectomy where protatectomy was spelled out.

Is this judgement excessive? Will the kids parents spend it all before he is 18? Should a judgement be divided into continued services insurance (psychiatric, urology, sex therapy) for his life time as well as some cash upon legal adulthood?

And of course, will his attorney be able to afford that luxury, staffed, vacation estate near Lake Tahoe? What was the lawyer's cut?

Moi

1 rat + 1 rat does not equal zero rats.

Hash (imported) wrote: Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:07 am Being familiar with surgical procedures, it dumbfounds me that the surgeon didn't immediately reattach the glans tip. Nerves might have been difficult to reattach, but in an infant, the nerves could have/would have regrown into the glans. Just utterly unbelievable. I haven't read the complete story and I don't know the details, circumstances might have involved the glans and it might have been unretrivable or seriously compromised, but something doesn't sound right. Incompetence seems to have been at play.

Maybe, because it says he couldn't visualize the head when excising the foreskin, he disposed of the foreskin and head together unknowningly, due to the faulty clamp and only discovered the accident later when it was to late to reattach the penis tip.

Yeah, good point. I'm pretty sure if they even just sort of bandaged it back together it might have healed into a reasonable state. Like you said, they must have disposed of it or something. Keep in mind that after a circumcision there are often bandages on for a couple days, so may not have been noticed for a while. That would have been a bit of a shock for the mom when she went to change the bandage and found him horribly mutilated.

I do hope the parents are vocal advocates against circumcision. The thing is that all procedures have possible complications, but no one ever thinks it will happen to them. I have this argument with my doctor all the time -- she'll prescribe some drug and I'll say I don't want to risk a possibility of stroke or whatever is listed. It might be statistically "safe" but that doesn't matter if you're the one who ends up affected. In other words, most people who take risks don't really accept the risk but rather just think they won't be the ones affected. Only gamble with what I'm willing to lose rather than thinking you will not lose.

Reading this I feel it will surely slow down the rate of circumcision in coming years, but I also am mystified as to why a week old infant is suffering trauma from the surgery. This boy has never known anything but what remains of his penis, and from the article I would assume that is the complete shaft. Since at his age no one is stripping down for P.E. at school, how is there any trauma. Additionally , since the only thing he has ever known is the way that he is, why would he not think that others looked strange rather than himself.

I sincerely hope that the judge imposed strict controls on the settlement money , so that the actual victim, and not his parents will benefit from it.

Raymar

He deserves every cent of that award.