An American man that went under the knife for a circumcision only to wake up with an amputation of his penis has asked the Kentucky Court of Appeals to overturn a previous verdict siding with the doctor who performed the operation. Phillip Seaton was supposed to undergo a standard circumcision as a treatment for an inflammation in October of 2007, but instead woke up to find his manhood missing.
The unscheduled amputation was necessary according to Dr. John Patterson, who discovered during the operation that Seaton had cancer in his joystick.
Seaton contends, however, that the amputation of his penis was not necessary, because other options could have been available to him.
The lawsuit contended that Dr. Patterson should have received consent from Seaton before performing the amputation. Seaton’s lawyer, Kevin George, stated:
“The point is … a patient has a right. The doctor does not have the right to do whatever he wants, even if it turns out to be reasonable.”
QUESTION:
1. Do you think the doctor should be jailed for removing the Man’s PENIS Without his Consent?
2. OR is he right for the action as he did it to save the Man's life?
3. What could have been the best option to treat the man's penis instead of amputating it.
Let's have your VIEWS.
Thanks.