Was what happened during my surgery legal?

Question

When i was 13 (now 21) I had surgery to remove my gallbladder they said it would be laprascopic (sp) (where they just insert the tube and basically suck out the stones, my surgery was supposed to take 30 it took 6 AND A HALF HOURS apparently my cytic duct and bile duct had fused together so they had to take part of my small intestines and remove my gallbladder all-together, My surgeon told me she called in 6 other surgeons!! Now I am still in pain from scar tissue and I can not find a surgeon willing to do it because of the (what i am told is rare/hard to do) it is called a roux and y. But my question is was it legal for them to just convert the type of surery withour asking my parents permission, they didnt come out and tell them what was going on for 4 hours!!! Also when i had the correction surgery at johns hopkins they had to remove 2 feet of my small intestines because they stopped working. I would not have a problem with this but the pain the surgery is causing is so horriffic i scream and cry and at my wits end. Plus i go to a really well known gastorointestional doctor at washington hospital and he told me to sue the first surgeon because she did way more then needed and botched it. They have talked about sending me cross country to CA to see if i can have the roux n y redo. Please any advice?

Answer 1

Your parents probably signed a consent form which covered the possibility of "complications".  Not to mention the hospital most likely has enough lawyers to make their case for them in court.  They could make the case that your life was in eminent danger preventing them from taking the time to obtain your parents' consent.  

My personal feelings are what they did to you was wrong.  If you found the right lawyer (and the right jury), you could win a lawsuit.  In fact, even just a descent lawyer could probably get you a settlement.  Sue the first doctor for malpractice and non-disclosure and her insurance company will probably want to settle out of court.  Sue the hospital for not taking administrative action against the first doctor, and the hospital's insurance company will most likely want to settle out of court.  Neither want bad publicity and both would be willing to pay to prevent it.

You might even be able to find a lawyer willing to take this on pro-bono if you can get your gastrointestinal doctor friend from Washington (or any other doctor) to sign a statement condemning the actions of the first doctor.  I think it's definately worth looking into.  You may have to talk to quite a few attorneys before you find one that will take your case.

Good Luck!!

Answer 2

First, I agree with Pangolin. It sounds like you had a fuzzy idea of what your surgery would involve unless you were scheduled for an ERCP to extract the stones.Which, by the way, is followed by a cholecystectomy once the patient is stable enough for surgery. A laparoscopic cholecystectomy involves inflating the abdomen then inserting a camera and, usually, three other ports through which instruments are passed during the operation. Second, your parents would have signed a consent form for a laparoscopic cholecystectomy with possible laparotomy. The term possible laparotomy means that, if necessary, the operation will change from laparoscopic to an open procedure (making a large incision). This is done as a last resort if the surgeon discovers a problem that cannot be fixed laparoscopically, if it would be too dangerous to try and continue to operate through the scope, or if there is a serious or life-threatening complication that requires full access and visualization. Also, if she called in 6 other surgeons, it means that your case was extremely complicated and she needed the help of other surgeons/specialists in order to decide the best way to proceed. The pain you now experience is likely due to one of several possible complications such as costochondritis caused by the location of the incision, contraction of scar tissue, neuroma, or adhesions. All of these possible causes of your pain would have been included in your consent form as possible risks of your surgery. It sounds like your case was unbelievably complicated and I'm sorry that you are now in pain. However, I don't think that suing your surgeon would be successful because your parents signed the consent and it also sounds like she and the other surgeons worked very hard to help you. I also do not believe that a roux-en-y would be appropriate at all for you, it is done to correct large common bile duct injuries at the time of the injury. And, since you are now 21, and have adequate GI function that type of surgery would be unecessary and would not relieve your pain.

Answer 3

Are you sure the pain you have is from the scar tissue?  Lots of people that get their gall bladder out have terrible pain because of the bile in their gastrointestinal system. A change of diet can help a lot. As for was it legal- it sort of sounds like they were freaking out and trying to keep you alive. The statue of limitations for filing a medical malpractice suit has probably run out since it happened 7 years ago. You need to really talk to a good gastro doctor about managing your condition and your pain.

Answer 4

First of all, your impression of laparoscopic cholecystectomy is completely wrong.  They NEVER just "suck out the stones".  They remove the gall bladder, and it usually goes very smoothly.

Having gall bladder disease at such a young age is very uncommon.  It sounds like you might have had abnormalities of the bile system that were not expected before surgery.

It was wrong not to inform your parents of what was going on (they must have been crazy with worry), but surgeons do what they have to do.  If 6 surgeons were called in, you must have had some pretty serious abnormality.

ALL surgical consents have a provision in them that the surgeon can do whatever needs to be done if circumstances come up (as happened in your case).

Gastroenterologists know precious little about surgery, so no matter how good yours is, he's still not a surgeon, and really isn't qualified to state whether or not a surgery was "botched".  I'd get the opinion of a general surgeon before believing that.

Your pain issues need to be addressed, but a roux en y may or may not be the answer.  Sometimes, after more surgery, you end up worse.  You may end up wearing a bag to collect your p**p (ileostomy), or having absorption issues and malnutrition.

It's always a good idea to get a second opinion, but if several doctors tell you that you don't need surgery, or that surgery is a bad idea, it might be wise to listen to them.  They don't want to make things worse.  Your belly is probably full of scar tissue, and that causes complications during surgery (excessive bleeding, damage to other structures, like your ureters, and so on).

If you think suing your first surgeon will correct all your problems, then go for it.  My guess is that she was confronted with a terrible situation and did what she had to do.