Gynecologist Laser-Branded Woman's Name In Uterus After Surgery As A "Friendly Gesture"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Doctor Branded Woman's Uterus After Surgery
Gynecologist says he lasered patient’s name in “friendly gesture”

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/doctor-branded-womans-uterus-after-surgery



SEPTEMBER 13--After performing a hysterectomy last year, a California gynecologist used a cauterizing tool to brand his patient’s name on her removed uterus, an unorthodox move that the doctor calls a “friendly gesture,” but which the woman terms “despicable conduct” in a medical negligence lawsuit.

In a Superior Court lawsuit filed earlier this month, Ingrid Paulicivic, a 47-year-old hairdresser, charges that Dr. Red Alinsod used an “electrocautery device to carve and burn” the word “Ingrid” on her uterus, which was removed during a June 2009 operation at his Orange County office.

Paulicivic alleges that the branding was done for “no medically necessary purpose or reason” and that she somehow suffered burns on her legs while the uterus was being marked, according to her complaint. In an interview, Paulicivic’s lawyer, Devan Mullins, called the branding “inexcusably bizarre behavior,” adding that the 50-year-old Alinsod was “fooling around and having fun.”

While noting that he has never previously branded an organ or body part removed during surgery, Alinsod told TSG that he wrote Paulicivic’s name on the uterus because he “did not want to get it confused with others.” Asked whether this was a standard way of labeling body parts, Alinsod acknowledged that it was not. Usually, he said, a patient’s name is written on an accompanying blue sterile towel or a sterile piece of wood like a tongue depressor.

Alinsod contended that Paulicivic’s hysterectomy--which was done under general anesthesia--was “uneventful” and that the matter of the uterus branding was a “red herring” raised by her legal counsel. He claimed that he “felt comfortable putting her name on the uterus” since Paulicivic, pictured above, was a “good friend.”

Though Alinsod referred to the branding as a “gesture of friendship,” Mullins said that his client “had never met him prior to the first consult,” adding that she was actually an acquaintance of a receptionist who works in the doctor’s Laguna Beach office.

Mullins said that Paulicivic and her husband Joe, a photographer, learned of the branding during a follow-up visit with Alinsod, during which she complained about the burns suffered during the operation. After seeing Alinsod examining photos taken during the operation, the couple asked for copies of the images. Alinsod told TSG that he complied with the request since he had “nothing to hide.”

[Dappleganger]

1. What a disgusting motherfucker.

:mad:

[Initech]

2. What the fucking fuck???

[Starry Messenger]

3. What. In. Fuck.

Seriously bizarre.

[Rex]

4. Uhm...er...uhhh...

WTF?

[Rochester]

5. Did he do it after he removed it from her?

If he did, this seems very eccentric but quite harmless. But if he burned her legs while doing it, then she has a valid complaint.

[ThomasQED]

7. That's what the first sentence of the article says

in which case I don't get the outrage. It's weird, but if it's been removed and is going to be disposed of, I don't see the harm.

[m00nbeam]

6. What a sicko.

WTF?

[peacefreak]

8. not to be rude, but

he should have his name cauterized on the inside of his member.

[Canuckistanian]

9. OOOO-Kay.....

Remind me NOT to become "friends" with this doctor.

[Radical Activist]

10. Does he also do circumcisions?

What a bizarre, gross thing to do.

[mike_c]

11. oh for pete's sake, all the outrage in this thread is silly....

The doctor branded her name on a piece of meat destined for the landfill, maybe with a stop on the way to a pathology lab or a histologist. Why would ANYONE care about that? What's the injury?

Burns on her legs are a different matter. There shouldn't be any reason for burns on her legs unless the hot cauterizing tip rested against her skin while she was under anesthesia. That's sloppy procedure, certainly. Medical negligence? I doubt it.

[Xithras]

13. I don't get the outrage either.

The body part had been removed from her body and was about to be incinerated anyway. What he did is certainly bizarre, but I don't see how it's anything more than that.

The burns on her legs are worth investigating though. That sounds like he botched something.

[tammywammy]

15. +1 n/t

[polly7]

18. If it was to be sent on for further examination, say for endometriosis, cancer,

would his actions have made it more difficult to do that? I realize the inside of the uterus is normally examined for these things, but wouldn't a pathologist prefer to see the whole of a uterus that has not been damaged? I don't know............. just sayin.

[pnwmom]

12. Pretty bizarre, but who cares? The uterus was already out of her.

Next stop was pathology.

[billlll]

14. "Arrogance Culture" in h-care must be wiped out by Reform

Next Reform wave must end

4 hour ER waits

No hsecalls...Eng and Germany do them

[kestrel91316]

16. Bizarre. Probably inappropriate. NOT a federal fucking case, nonetheless.

[dkf]

17. This outrage seems a bit convenient to me.

Sorry to be so cynical but I see $$$ here.

[lunasun]

19. sounded like a good reason to sue ; so they did nt

[Pavulon]

20. Are we talking criminal charges or is this a negociation for cash?(nt)