"LEXINGTON - A woman is accusing her doctor of branding her uterus with his alma mater’s initials before removing the organ during a hysterectomy.
Stephanie Means and her husband sued Dr. James Guiler on Wednesday, seeking unspecified damages for emotional distress.
The lawsuit said a videotape of the surgery clearly shows the University of Kentucky booster using a cauterizing tool to write “UK” in letters 2 inches high.
“They want to see that it isn’t done to other women,” said the couple’s attorney, Michael Dean.
Guiler did not immediately return calls Friday.
The doctor performed the surgery Aug. 14 at Central Baptist Hospital in Lexington.
Guiler received his medical degree from the university and last year was a sponsor of Wildcat Madness, a fund-raiser for the school’s basketball museum. "
I can see how this could be fairly distressing to have this sort of thing happen.
I’m not a woman, so I can’t say for sure, but if I was say… getting castrated for some reason, testicular cancer maybe. And the doctor wrote ‘I wuz here’ on the boys before tossing them in the trash, then yeah, I’d be a little distressed. Who cares if they’re getting removed.
Geez, Central Baptist’s OB/GYNs are going out of their way to make national news these days, aren’t they? (Another of them was the fundie doctor that Bush nominated for a panel position.) I guess they’re trying to out-do the program at UK, which has had its own internal scandals in the past few years. (Oh, the stories I could tell…)
I’m on the fence here. If it had been my (non-existent) uterus, I would have found it somewhat amusing. However, it is not my place to decide what someone else should find offensive. I support her right to sue. A doctor should never do anything he wouldn’t be willing to defend in front of a jury, and this is no exception.
This country as a whole has become far too litigious. Personally, I think there should be severe restrictions on what one can and cannot sue for. To me, this does not qualify, nor does any suit based on ‘emotional distress’. Dumb move by the Doc? Definitely, and he should be punished for it. But the patient deserves no compensation. She got the operation she needed/wanted. Maybe you think I’m cold, but think about this the next time you have to pay a medical bill. A large percentage of what you are paying is for malpractice insurance, the cost of which is driven up each year by lawsuits.
I don’t see the harm, since the uterus was being removed. I don’t believe the woman had any real “distress.” I think she just saw dollar signs after viewing the videotape. I’m sure she’ll put on a big, sobbing performance on the stand but I say the hell with her. She wasn’t injured. It’s just a greedy lady.
The “brandishing tool”, I suspect, was the Bovey, a very routine surgical implement used for cutting and for electrocautery. It would be unlikely to cause injury if dropped, as the doc would just have to take his foot off the pedal to stop it. He’s also not more likely to cause damage with it while making his little mark than he is during the two hours of the actual hysterectomy.
All right now, I heard on ABC news last night that it is not uncommon for doctors to mark uteruses in such procedures for identification purposes. I don’t know why they would need to mark the uterus; it’s just what they said on the news. But it seems like the guy is working at Central Baptist; as far as I can tell, there’s just no good excuse for writing “UK” on the uterus.
I think it was immature for the doctor to do it, but I don’t think he should be held liable for any damage. Just another frivolous lawsuit.
Actually, The Weak Force, if what ABC News is correct, it might be that this doctor wasn’t being immature at all. If it’s true that the uteri are “marked for identification purposes,” you would want each doctor to have his/her own unique mark. This guy probably picked “UK” as his own mark. It wouldn’t make sense for every doctor at Central Baptist to use “Central Baptist” or “CB” as their mark.
I don’t remember us doing that when I was sitting through hysterectomy after hysterectomy back in med school, but some docs may do that. It makes sense, really.
It would be more likely that every doctor at CBH would use “UK”. For one thing, a lot of them (including this one, IIRC) are adjunct UK faculty. For another thing, this is Lexington, KY we’re talking about…(Go Big Blue!)
I’m not sure in what alternate universe uteri are “marked for identification purposes”.
As a pathologist I’ve personally handled hundreds if not thousands of the little devils, and none have been marked with initials, numbers, cabalistic symbols or university logos. A requisition slip and appropriately labeled container are enough (and by the way, removed organs of any consequence are never just thrown away, they are examined in the pathology laboratory for disease).
Probably the patient involved in this case should be content with seeing the doc reprimanded and/or suspended for being a twit.
If the pathologist is a U. of Louisville fan, now maybe he/she should sue for emotional distress (they take their basketball very seriously in the Bluegrass State).
I can’t see why he wouldn’t be liable. I working in a path lab and a micro lab for several years and never once saw an organ or tissue marked in any manner. As a matter of fact, I would think it would be detrimental to purposely damage the tissue prior to path exam.
The doctor was playing around - spending time drawing on a anaestethized patient’s organs, which seems awful to me.
Furthermore, women don’t undergo hysterectomies for fun, either. The procedure is performed on patients with serious medical problems, and it’s emotionally painful to have to deal with a major change in plumbing. To find out the doctor behaved in that manner just adds insult to injury. Why aren’t punitive damages in order?
The doctor is moron and should be disciplined by the hospital, or the state board. It was unprofessional. But there is no injury here. The courts should NOT be involved.
IMHO, any additional time spent under anaesthesia is an unwarranted medical risk. I know it didn’t take long for him to inscribe his alma mater on the soon-to-be-disposed organ, but it wasn’t medically necessary.
If he really wants to practice his cautery calligraphy, he can do it post-closure when the patient in on her way to the recovery room.
Is he liable? Yes.
PS- I’m glad he didn’t attend Texas Western Agricultural and Technical college.
Well, DANG, I just didn’t know it was an option to have my uterus branded when I had MINE out. I certainly would have enjoyed the thought of having a cabalistic symbol inscribed on mine, after I was all stitched up and in the recovery room.
Seriously, though, I am disturbed at the thought of a doctor allowing a patient to be under anesthesia for even a second longer to indulge in the doc’s sense of school loyalty.
Well, I have to wonder if maybe the electrocautery was acting up, or had been earlier in the day. When our machine was acting up, the vet would often “test” it on whatever we were going to remove before actually proceding with the removal. Usually, he’d just stick it on there, but I could see someone who was bored (and frankly, hysterectomy is a terribly dull procedure, especially after the first few) getting a bit more creative with it.
Personally, I don’t really see what the big deal is. He didn’t damage something that was staying in her body, he didn’t impair her recovery. She was not endangered in any way by the extra fifteen seconds of anesthesia. Yeah, it wasn’t the best thing he could have done under the circumstances, and he shouldn’t do it again.
The bulk of this lawsuit is just ridiculous, though. She suffered NO actual damages, just being upset about the situation, so all she can realistically sue for is pain and suffering. Her husband’s suit about loss of spousal comfort is likewise pretty groundless. His lack of “comfort” is due to her having abdominal surgery, not to the UK thing.
