Quantcast
Home | Back

Doctor accused of amputating man's genitals against wishes

Share Story:     Share_email E-mail Story    |    Share_print Print Story    |    Comments    |   

State Journal Staff Report
September 25, 2008

A lawsuit accuses a Frankfort doctor of amputating a man's penis without his consent, according to a newspaper.

A malpractice suit was filed in Shelby County Circuit Court last week against Dr. John Patterson of Frankfort, who performed the surgery, Dr. Oliver James of Shelbyville, who administered the anesthetic, and Commonwealth Urology, PSC according to the Shelbyville Sentinel.

Phillip and Deborah Seaton of Waddy, say Phillip went to Patterson last October for a circumcision, which resulted in the doctor removing Phillip's penis, according to the newspaper.

The lawsuit states that, "Despite having no consent to remove his penis and despite being advised by Phillip that he did not want him to remove any part of his penis other than the foreskin, Dr. Patterson removed the penis," the newspaper reported.

James is included in the suit because he gave Seaton a general anesthetic after assuring the patient he wouldn't, according to the Sentinel.

"Because Dr. James changed the anesthesia to general anesthesia, he allowed Dr. Patterson to amputate Phillip's penis," according to the suit. "Without that change, the surgery would have ended."

The lawsuit claims that the actions of Patterson and James were intentional, willful and wanton, according to the Sentinel.

The suit says that Seaton has suffered and will suffer much mental anguish and pain, as well as a loss of enjoyment of life, and that he will incur medical expenses because of the injury.




Comments
By Posting to this site, you agree to our Terms of Service Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed. State-Journal.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.

Login above or Register to comment.
Jump to Page: 1 2 3 4
Previous 10 Comments    of 40 Total Comments
10.
    Posted by perplexed September 25, 2008
This story didn't mention the cancer found.

9.
    Posted by Tyler Durden September 25, 2008
"as well as a loss of enjoyment of life"

I guess he will have to pick up hobby like sewing or basket weaving

8.
    Posted by Tyler Durden September 25, 2008
Just a little off the top Doc

7.
    Posted by Tyler Durden September 25, 2008
Once again, What SJ no pictures.

6.
    Posted by doesitreallymattereddie? September 25, 2008
Next Weeks State Journal Poll Question:

Which do you find more surprising?
(1) A Frankfort Doctor removed the reproductive organ in an operation that was only supposed 'take a little off the top'.

(2) The State Journal didn't post a picture of the dismembered gentleman (or his likeness) on the front page.

5.
    Posted by doesitreallymattereddie? September 25, 2008
First we have Deer poop, and now this... any takers on whether this is the most viewed topic by 10 tomorrow.

4.
    Posted by godloveusall2 September 25, 2008
Maybe that all he seen was the skin.
Don't try to make something that wasn't there.
Go to the xrate store maybe they can help you

3.
    Posted by Man O Steel September 25, 2008
Maybe only the foreskin was removed!!!

2.
    Posted by Jimidee September 25, 2008
Drunks behaving badly...

1.
    Posted by wwdamron September 25, 2008
hmmm

Previous 10 Comments   | Home | Back