In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Medical Ethics question
slumlord44
Member Posts: 3,702 ✭✭✭
Friend of mine went in for Prostrate cancer surgery a while back. Going in he made it clear to the doctors and his wife and kids that he wanted to know exactly how bad it was and the details. He came through fine and is doing well now. He found out much later, after it was all over, that he only had a 20% chance of survival going in. He was pissed to say the least. Can they leagaly and moraly do this? I would sure want to know going in what the odds were.
Comments
Strange but true. His wife is an anastegelogist so I am thinking she may have had influence with the doctors. Guy has filed for divorce and this is one of the reasons the way I see it.
Well where do the kids fit in... sponge nurses?
Strange but true. His wife is an anastegelogist so I am thinking she may have had influence with the doctors. Guy has filed for divorce and this is one of the reasons the way I see it.
He must be worth more alive than dead[;)]
Sounds to me like your friend was just looking for any reason to divorce his wife. Not being informed of chances is a flimsy-* excuse and if I were a betting man, I'd bet the real reason is a bit deeper than just not being told of his survival chances...
Friend of mine went in for Prostrate cancer surgery a while back. Going in he made it clear to the doctors and his wife and kids that he wanted to know exactly how bad it was and the details. He came through fine and is doing well now. He found out much later, after it was all over, that he only had a 20% chance of survival going in. He was pissed to say the least. Can they leagaly and moraly do this? I would sure want to know going in what the odds were.See red above...Why?...would forego the surgery and die of cancer knowing a 20% survival rate....very strange post
I doubt if I'd divorce the wife over it, but she would know I'm somewhat less than pleased.
I don't know about the legally, but if I'm paying somebody United States Yankee cash money to tell me what kind of condition I'm in and they lie to me, I'm some kind of pissed.
I doubt if I'd divorce the wife over it, but she would know I'm somewhat less than pleased.Why?
See red above...Why?...would forego the surgery and die of cancer knowing a 20% survival rate....very strange post
If you want to go through life with other people making your decisions for you, that's your privilege. It's for your own good after all. That's almost as good as "It's for the children".
It looks like you're in for a happy future. [:)]
quote:Originally posted by reloader44mag
See red above...Why?...would forego the surgery and die of cancer knowing a 20% survival rate....very strange post
If you want to go through life with other people making your decisions for you, that's your privilege. It's for your own good after all. That's almost as good as "It's for the children".
It looks like you're in for a happy future. [:)]
This whole thread is based on an assumption that the wife and kids are somehow involved in the situation as to survival of this guy....The OP makes NO sense at all...other than the treating doctor part...who did he learn from that he only had a 20% survival rate...facts missing and conclusions being made[:)]....happens here ALL the time[;)]
This whole thread is based on an assumption that the wife and kids are somehow involved in the situation as to survival of this guy....The OP makes NO sense at all...other than the treating doctor part...who did he learn from that he only had a 20% survival rate...facts missing and conclusions being made[:)]....happens here ALL the time[;)]
In the old days when any cancer was pretty much a death sentence it was common practice to tell the wife or husband and kids and advise them not to tell the cancer victim. The theory was to make the cancer victim's last days as worry free as possible for as long as possible.
The theory sucked then and it sucks now.
I have found the relative chances for such things don't mean much. They do not take in to account any factors of the individual etc and are weighted buy the fact many receiving a surgery/procedure commonly have additional complications. His chances may very well have been much better,doctors dislike putting things in such a 'box' sounds like a pretty ungrateful person to me.
well put
Talk about ethics.
Where in the Hell do they get off, by making you wear those damn little exam room gowns? [:(!]
They have never made me wear a gown....the nurses prolly just want to know if you are a he or a she[:)]
I also question the claim he had only a 20% chance of surviving a prostate operation operation unless he had heart or other critical issues going in.
the Surgery or Ultimate survival rate from
the Cancer?
I had my prostate removed robotically and I
understand the the survival rate of that operation
is the same as any operation ,
there are risks involved.
This man must have underlying medical issues
and if so ,I can see his concern.
Certainly not enuff to divorce his wife tho.
Prostate cancer is one of those diseases where there has been a lot of research done on predicting the outcome. "Going in", he had only his PSA & his pathology report showing his Gleason score; these are a rough predictor, & nowhere near certain. Like most prostate patients, he could have bought a copy of Dr Patrick Walsh's book, Surviving Prostate Cancer, which explains just about everything.
Only the post-surgical pathology is definitive. That tells you if the cancer has spread beyond the capsule, to the vas deferens, seminal vesicles, & to the blood stream & other organs. At that point, you have a more complete picture of your condition, but long term survival for most patients has improved every year for the past 30 years. The % survival is always made looking back, not with the current treatment in mind.
Neal
Friend of mine went in for Prostrate cancer surgery a while back. Going in he made it clear to the doctors and his wife and kids that he wanted to know exactly how bad it was and the details. He came through fine and is doing well now. He found out much later, after it was all over, that he only had a 20% chance of survival going in. He was pissed to say the least. Can they leagaly and morally do this? I would sure want to know going in what the odds were.
Interestingly JAMA recently released a study regarding this issue, discussing the whether it was ethical for a Dr. to lie to a patient, by omission or exaggeration of their prognosis. From a psychological perspective it may benefit the patient to have am exaggerated prognosis as emotional state can effect healing. In the PSA they stated that it is a gray area, and really depends on the nature of the lie and motivation for it. Human beings lie, mislead, exaggerate and or intentional misstate facts everyday for all sorts of good and bad motivations. Why would Drs be any different?
Secondly, medicine is not an exact science, who is the expert that can say he had a 20% chance of survival, and not 25% or 40%, he is upset about something he shouldn't be in my opinion. Now if they remove his wanker instead of his prostate then he should be upset!!!
It appears that he was "told"
he had a 20% chance of surviving
the operation, which leads me to believe
he has other medical issues.
How about the real estate salesman who doesn't tell you your new house is in a floodplain because he wants you to enjoy the new house until it gets washed away?
procedures and I've always
been informed of what to expect.
Never has a doctor lied to me except
for the dick that got me hooked on oxycontin.
"witdrawal is like the flu" my * it is.
ron
That said, I believe an explanation is in order....If, going into surgery you are told you have a 20 percent chance of surviving, a person goes into the surgery knowing they have an 80 percent chance of dying...Now if they are told they have an 80 percent chance of surving the surgery, guess how the patient is going into surgery...
They go in with an optomistic attitude, looking forward to waking up, you think the dr is going to say to you that you only have a 20 percent chance of getting thru this?...They might tell the family but they arent going to tell you...they want you to go into surgery with a good outlook, not bleak...Attitude can affect how the surgery goes...
When Larry had his surgery for the abdominal aneurysm, the drs didnt give odds...they told of the risks, what could happen and the BEST that could happen...
They didnt tell Larry but they told me when they took him into surgery...DONT LEAVE THE HOSPITAL...they needed me there in case the aneurysm ruptured ...He was told after it was over...Ethics?...no way in hell it was...my husband needed to go into that surgery with a very good outlook, not told his wife was not to leave etc...
Read this on ethics..
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion10015.page?
If the surgeon gave him a rosier picture to convince him to have the surgery in spite of bad odds instead of consulting radiation oncology, I can see an ethics violation. At the same time I have a hard time imagining a surgeon caring so little for their patient.
The whole point here is that if I, as the paitient, want to know all the details and all the odds going into a surgery, I think I have the right to be told and no doctor has the right to lie to me or withhold any information.
whatever
The stress of the surgery combined with the information they withheld might have caused complications that they were trying to avoid.
The whole point here is that if I, as the paitient, want to know all the details and all the odds going into a surgery, I think I have the right to be told and no doctor has the right to lie to me or withhold any information.
For what it's worth, I agree with you.
Giving a patient hope is part of good medicine. When the truth is necessary, like for getting your things in order, Then yes, I could see it being a problem not to be straight.
The Doctor erred on the side of the patient. In the patient's best interest no less.
I think the patient should remove his head from his rectum on this one.
My two cents.
EDIT: Having just gone through prostate surgery I can tell you the treatment for someone with a 20% chance of survival isn't much different from someone with an 80% chance.
I don't think they send you home to get your things in order unless your chances are much less than twenty.
We have a 27 y/o lady friend with stage 4 cancer and she has little or no chance of surviving, but the cancer is so rare they want to learn more about it, so she is up at Oregon Health Sciences getting the very best of care. She just wants to live long enough so hold her new child so she will remember her after she is gone.
All they want is every day they can give her, no matter how few.
So true!