Hello everyone
I am a new member and I am here to educate potential patients/customers
what can happen,what happens,in the 21 Century ,overhere,in the USA,regulary to thousands of people.
I say the medical field Hair Transplant,that many of you here call HT “Industry” has no ethic and has no established criteria among the surgeons,what should be acceptable standard of care for the potential patient.
You could be abused,butchered,abandoned by the surgeon in the midle of the surgery,non qualified personel could perform medical tasks on you,etc etc.WITHOUT ANY consequences for them.
So if you consider to put you future in the hands of the HT "Industry "read this first.
NO ETHICS
It is assertion pertaining to the VAST majority of HT surgeons.(in fact I don’t know of any HT surgeon who does not exercise habitual practices prohibited by law as I will describe in my post).
Some of you have already, like me, undergone HT surgery, so you will know what I am talking about because you will recognize that in fact what I say is true.
Some of you are thinking about having HT surgery
and I recommend before you decide to do so, check for a HT doctor who will answer NO to the questions I ask below. So far no one did .
here it is:
For the doctors claiming (having/practicing) ethics as opposed to someone else who doesn’t.I ask you:
A.
1.How many of you personally evaluate the patient sufficiently so you could formulate an appropriate pre-operative diagnosis, and how many of you use “consultant” non medical person to do it for you? In addition and related to this how many of you explain pros and cons of HT surgery so patient intelligently can decide about his options (informed consent) and how many of you give that to the “consultant” as well?
-
How many of you perform or personally supervise all aspects of the surgery? Including placement of the grafts in the receptor sites? And how many of you carve the patient, take the strip, suture the wound, make incisions (holes) in patient head and then leave the surgical room and patient and leave the rest to the "surgical technicians”? Do you have in other words, aspects of the surgery outside of your supervision performed or supervised by another qualified surgeon with the consent of the patient?
-
How many of you fail to personally perform post-operative medical care? How many of you delegate post-operative medical care to a non-qualified medical professional or to a non medical professional at all?
-
Do you recklessly delegate medical tasks in violation of the Administrative Codes in your states?
5.Does any of you negligently and recklessly delegate the tasks of selecting the donor site to harvest the hair follicles for transplant in the preceptor site by letting the "surgical technicians” choose the location of the same by shaving and preparing patient just before surgery?
6.Do you and how many of you negligently and recklessly and ILLEGALY delegate the tasks of administering anesthesia to patient to persons not qualified under your state law? (everywhere in USA it is a law only DOCTOR can administer anesthesia)
-
How many of you negligently and recklessly delegate the tasks of preparing the donor grafts, and insertion of the donor grafts into the surgically prepared receptor sites ,with your supervision ,to your "surgical technicians”? How many of you negligently and recklessly delegate the tasks of preparing the donor grafts, and insertion of the donor grafts into the surgically prepared receptor sites ,WITHOUT your supervision ,to your "surgical technicians” while you chill outside the surgical room for hours? In violation of your administrative laws of your state.
-
How many of you have never seen the patient until just before surgery and therefore Lack Informed Consent in Violation of the Law in your state?
-
How many of you have “surgical technicians” engaged in the practice of medicine and surgery without the appropriate certificate from the State Medical Board in your state, in violation of the law in your state?
B.This questions are for the HT experts that post on this forum.
C.If you answer NO we don’t do it…reply to me please I want to talk to you. However I doubt that any of you will.
D.Let me tell you something about YOUR standard of CARE .As long as ANY of you physicians think that you can successfully pretend that you are ignorant of, what common people,(like for example some jury would be consisted of), knows, which is, abandoning patient,“surgical technicians” giving anesthesia…doing the whole surgery in fact, while Surgeon is somewhere else,” Consultants" playing doctor on patients, leaving "surgical technicians determine where doctor will carve someone’s head…etc etc is not care YOU are businesman,not a physician, and the HT surgery is busines,not medical field of elective surgery.
Because I know ,and hopefully many others soon will know, that conducts as such are disgusting violations of patient rights and abuse, resulting in butchery on the MAJORITY oh HT patients (customers).
And when some disfigured patient wants to seek justice in Court, none of you will dare to say the obvious, that conducts described above are not ,are forbidden to be, considered as a standard of care.
ANY REPLY DOCTORS?
I write a long post but I won’t apologize suppose if one does not like what I write one can skip reading. I have not even started writing yet.
If one reads my previous post one would notice that described conducts (by commission and omission) are violations of certain laws (either administrative laws of medical boards or the Law codes of the states).
Now that premise considered I will try to argue, what was never argued before.
In most medical malpractice Law suits plaintiff needs a doctor to state in writing that in that doctors opinion his colleague breached the standard of care. That is necessary (in most cases) element to FILE claim for med malpractice. Most doctors in the HT “industry” unfortunately brake all those things that I mentioned in my previous post, although illegal, they do brake them.
So when one, like for example me, goes to other HT doctors and tells them the story, no HT doctor wants to sign affidavit of merit (because I assume such conducts are epidemic in the HT industry).
Thus, grieved patient, can not even start the law suit, because does not have the element of affidavit of merit from another doctor that the standard of care was breached.
That is why there is NOT MANY LAW SUITS AGAINST HT DOCTORS,
They protect each other by the simple fact that it is almost impossible to find HT doctor willing to testify against another.
That has been exceedingly successful shield they have against law suits.
However, I will try to argue something that never was argued before.
Like I said in most cases expert is needed to testify in Med malpractice case. But not all cases.
It is well-settled with the Courts that expert testimony is required only when the asserted negligence does not lie within the jury’s comprehension as a matter of common knowledge, when the applicable standard of care is not a matter of common knowledge, and when the jury must have the assistance of experts to decide the issue of negligence.
In other words, why need an expert when it is obvious that negligence or recklessness or even intend to purposely disfigure is obvious to a common guy" That doctrine in the law is called res ipsa…
Res ipsa loquitur is a legal term from the Latin meaning, “the thing itself speaks” but is more often translated “the thing speaks for itself.” It signifies that further details are unnecessary; the proof of the case is self-evident.
Now, The one who filed law suit (plaintiff) has to show to the court, without any expert, that:
(1)
That the instrumentality causing the injury was, at the time of the injury, or at the time of the creation of the condition causing the injury, under the exclusive management and control of the defendant; "
(2) that the injury occurred under such circumstances that in the ordinary course of events it would not have occurred if ordinary care had been observed."
Like I said HT surgeons will never say that another HT breached the standard because most of them do the same thing.
But I ask this, Surgical facilities (not licensed),surgical staff and their competence as surgeons team (not licensed to administer anesthesia and select where doctor will carve patient, donor site),pre-medical consultation and explanation of pros and cons of surgery (done by consultant),Pre med diagnosis (for example, blood work not done),Actual carving and suturing donor site being only action done on patient by the surgeon and all other aspects of the surgery delegated to “surgical technicians” (non qualified licensed),postoperative treatment of wound infection via telephone (because most of the time patients and doctors are miles away)are all instrumentality in exclusive control of the Surgeon.
The surgeon has the control, but he chose to abandon the control, and leave the pre operative diagnosis, actual surgery, post operative care to be performed not by him directly, not even with his supervision (how it is done).
He makes that choice unilaterally (without patients consent) and illegally, abandoning patient in middle of surgery.
So I disagree that "those facts are exceedingly difficult to satisfy/prove and one needs another HT surgeon to testify that the standard was breached”. The surgeons have control, they (some of them or most of them as you please) chose not to have control and surgeon had control not to choose to delegate his control, illegally.
The second requirement ,The second argument that “that the injury occurred under such circumstances that in the ordinary course of events it would not have occurred if ordinary care had been observed.”
I would argue that if HT surgeon told patient pros and cons of surgery as he should have, patient might not undergo it, that if patient knew he, the surgeon, would not perform the surgery him self patient might have decided , should have not agreed to, under go it, If he would have chosen, because it was in his control to choose it, and it was his duty to choose it, the donor site incision, he would have chosen it in higher or lower position on patients head because of reasons that HT surgeons know where location should be and risks of significant scaring occurring if not positioned properly. If surgeon had performed, or at least supervised the performance of placing the grafts in the receptors sites ,the injury, the adverse outcome would not have occurred because HT surgeons know and should know how those grafts are placed properly in order to appear natural when they grow, in the direction of how hair grows naturally as advertised by them. Had surgeon been there he would know did the “surgical technicians” place all the grafts, or maybe only 1000 or maybe only 200.Had he ,(surgeon) provided qualified person to dig in the postoperative wound on the donors site, to try to recognize and find absorbable sutures, with scissors, it would not for example (mine example)be done by hairdresser lady who did not have clue what those are,digged with scissors 40 minutes and caused me extreme pain and possibly worsening the scar. No all that would not have occurred if ordinary care had been observed. I don’t understand why is that so difficult to see. Why is difficult to see that I disagree that medical expert needs to say that all of the above must not have happened, and adverse effects and injury would not have happened had the control HT surgeons had and by law must have ,chose to abandon having the control, to unilaterally, and illegally make that choice.Ignorantia legis non excusat – ignorance of the law does not excuse.
The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by any members of the medical profession ,engaged in the same (or any) type of medical practice or specialty in the locality (or anywhere in USA)in which he practices or in a similar locality; first and most, makes them aware (that skill and learning does),that like every other member of the community, every citizen, by provisions of the law, delimits certain actions that he can or must (physicians )do by commission or omission .Physicians, like everyone else must obey the law .
This is the definition of acceptable standard of care :
The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by members of the profession of the medical care provider in good standing, engaged in the same type of practice or specialty in the locality in which he practices or in a similar locality;
So far this definition was interpreted by the lawyers that doctors only determine The degree of skill and learning. I disagree.
While I agree that The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by the doctors is determined statistically(how the majority does it) law provisions delimit certain actions used by doctors (even though if it happens that majority of them does it) as ILLEGAL!
The Law provisions forbidding certain conduct, have supremacy over the Certain forbidden conducts and make them VOID to be considered any kind of care.
So to simplify this definition (standard of care),so far has been interpreted that doctors only determine The degree of skill and learning. I disagree. While I agree that The degree of skill and learning ordinarily possessed and used by the doctors is determined statistically (how the majority does it) law provisions delimit certain actions used by doctors (even though if it happens that majority of them does it) as ILLEGAL! And thus makes them VOID to be considered any kind of care.
They can’t be care, they are illegal.
No one ever argued the obvious - that violations of the things that I state above automatically(without the need of expert)makes those violations medical negligence. If any of this elements exist med negligence should be presumed! And the burden should be shifted to defendant to prove how the law which delimited certain actions forbidden because are considered dangerous for patient,can be in his case considered acceptable care.
So, while I am aware that lack of informed consent is different ground for seeking remedies, as well as unlicensed practice of medicine, battery derived from lack of inf consent, abandoning patient etc…are all different grounds in the Law suit (I am aware of that ) I am saying it should be argued this (never argued before but so obvious to me )
By law doctor is required to inform patient about pros cons of surgery so patient intelligently can exercise his Informing potential patient of that is (can anyone argue otherwise) the pre-operative care!
By Law doctor can not delegate certain medical tasks ( as he did in my case) to certain people. The performance of surgical tasks (can anyone argue otherwise) is the essence of the activities where most of the medical care and skill is exercised on patient! Same for the rest .
So yes doctors do determine “this is common
practice and done by most in our field" as long as does not violate the law
No one ever argued the obvious that violations of the things that I state above automatically(without the need of expert)makes those violations medical negligence.
If any of this elements exist med negligence should be presumed!
And the burden should be shifted to defendant to prove how the law which delimited certain actions forbidden because are considered dangerous for patient, can be in his case considered acceptable care.
This argument if prevails gives a chance for future plaintiffs can by-pass the shield made by the doctors lobby which simplified is" if you want to sue us one of us has to tell on the other he he he …good luck.
You who read this may ask your self…But why? Why would Physicians (lets say some physicians)
brake the laws and violate patients rights? Why someone who spent 10 years to become M.D or D.O, highly educated, would brake the laws continually, would violate patients rights continually? What is the MOTIVE?
Fair enough, good question, and I will tell you why.
The motive is, like in any business ,or as they call it now "Industry ",money, profit.
What makes business successfull?To be competitive against same entities offering the same services or product on the market, to the consumer.
How do you become and stay competitive?
By making the product or service cost effective so you could offer to the consumer low prices.
And how is that possible related to the Hair Transplant surgery, called now, most appropriately, Industry?
By delegating physicians tasks to non physician, very often non medical personnel.
That is extremely cost effective. One hour of physician time is worth 200 - 400 dollars an hour. One hour of "surgical technician "time is worth 20 - 40 dollars per hour.
So to get more cost effective service/product, the businessman/physician in order to stay in the “business” is forced to delegate more and more tasks that he has duty to perform him self, to “surgical technicians” and “consultants”.
You may say…but that is illegal. And you are right. It is. But who cares .HT “Industry” made a code, Never give a chance victim of malpractice in HT surgery to go to Court and expose the illegal practice.
The legislator presumed that there is no business code ,but rather, medical and ethical code so gave the physicians initial power of determination to decide, was it or not breach to duty of care.
However the paradox now is to stay competitive in the game, most surgeons have to do the same thing.
