Circumcision gone wrong: Man Sues Doctors For Amputating Penis

In order to liberate the penis it was necessary to destroy it.

I need more information.

How invasive was the cancer?
What type was it?

When go under the knife every day for a routine procedure, and wake up sans utererus and ovaries.

Erm....the nature of the cancer is a bit immaterial.

There would have been nothing to stop the medical team from waking the poor fella and talking to him.

If "whens" are women, and women are going in for routine procedures and waking up without uterii and ovaries, then, in the absence of the discovery of a catastrophic heammorhage or infection or somesuch during surgery, they are having illegal operations unless they consented to such surgery taking place if deemed necessary.

This happening to women does not make the removal of a penis without consent ok.

Yeah... eek.

I think the guy messed up and then tried to cover for it. (Yep, cancer, I swear...)

Well, that's easily determined by examining the penis.

Yeah. I read the whole article and it didn't say.

Yeah.....the article loked kind of iffy to me.

The site looked kind of iffy.

(Do Americans do "iffy"?)

We invented "iffy."

In fact, I did. In 1978. A Tuesday, I believe.

I was using iffy before that.

You imperialist, you!

I invented matronising too, so take that!

The word or the 'tude?

Dapad runs naked and screaming through the room.

Word.


I think it's a dead heat who invented the 'tude.

Why?

Because I am an attention whore

Since when is it necessary to have general anesthesia for a routine circumcision?

Oh wait, I see from the article that the guy is also suing the anesthesiologist.

Sounds to me like the entire operation was just an enormous cock-up.