Do diagnosticians occupy the same reality as me?

[Lanacrist]

I belive this might be a case where your sister have to pay for the medical professions bad conscience over what it has done in the past. Post world war 2 there was an outcry over the way that the medical profession let itself be involved with the "purification" of humanity by sanctioning sterilization of "unwanted elements"(ppl with wrong ethnicity, low IQ or women who just wouldnt behave properly - ie have pre-marital sex). This carried on for quite some time even long AFTER the war ended, in Sweden where I live ppl with mental disorders where sterilized on VERY loose grounds up until the 60-70s.

So to counter that anything like this would happen again alot of countries made special rules for this kind of surgery on people with any kind of disability of handicap. The rules vary from country to country and it seems that Canada has opted for a ethics commite to "double-check" so that there is no foul play.

I hope your sister gets the procedure done, there seems to be a clear medical need for it and then the commite shouldnt want to stop it.

 

[Megalodon]

It's probably just the diagnostician's department making sure they're covered from any potential fallout down the line. I'd presume they want it fully on record that going ahead with the procedure is OK. While I don't know about your circumstance, covering yourself during diagnostics is damn important, at least in genetics, I assume it's similar for the rest of medicine.

Either way, hope it works out for you and your sister soon.

 

[Strazdas]

wow this story gives your avatar a whole new meaning.
go to a country where they dont have stupidity like this and do the operation. there is abosolutely no need for her to suffer. and there is NOTHING WRONG with not wanting to be able to have children.

One though: did you consider having some respectable psychiatrist "determine" that your sister is capable of making her own decisions, and use that as a proof that you are not abusing her mental state? or have you tried that already?

 

[Spade Lead]

No, it's not. Don't act like you know everything about our own situation. We've gotten the message, we know the reasons. There's not a thing the ethics board can do about messed up surgeries.

Except prevent unnecessary ones...

I'm in Canada, brah. They're covered for malpractice by the government. Not only that, but malpractice suits are rare here anyhow. We don't feel the need to reclaim $10,000,000 because the surgery is almost entirely paid for by the government.

And if surgeons are "worried they might have an accident", then that's pathetic in itself.

No, they are worried that self-righteous idiots who get offended that the whole world doesn't do exactly what they say when they say it will ask for an unnecessary surgery that can be complicated by certain factors that the patient already has, such as mental conditions or physical disabilities...

You know, you asked why they need to see a "Ethics Board" and then get all "You don't know me, how dare you say that" when I tried to explain that it isn't a reflection on you or them, just standard "cover your ass" medical practice designed to protect the patient, surgeon, hospital, and in your case, country from unnecessary harm and risk, be it physical or financial.

It sucks that your sister is in pain, but would you rather have her in pain, or dead from a surgery that wasn't necessary that went wrong. You do realize that patients can die from accidents that are no fault of the surgeon on completely routine procedures, right? The vagaries of the human body have that effect.

My mother had to sign a waiver for medical liability just for me to be put under when I was 8 getting my tonsils removed. If that isn't a routine procedure, then there is no such thing.

 

[Quaxar]

I don't see the issue. If she clearly appears psychologically unstable like you said I wouldn't be comfortable performing any possibly life-altering operatins without a safeguard as well. Normal people can sign a waiver and you're covered but if you can claim that you weren't sane at the time of decisionmaking due to a psychological condition what's to stop you from legal steps.
It doesn't matter if you say you are sure you won't sue, that doesn't have any legal hold.

Anyway, to the intertubes!
<youtube=Qit3ALTelOo>
<youtube=Hm2BdCbZkKY>

 

[Colour Scientist]

It's unfortunate for your family but it does make sense from a professional point of you.

Under normal circumstances, doctors are hesitant to perform hysterectomies, especially on young women. When you add in the factor that, from an outsider's perspective, your sister may not be capable of making an informed decision on this kind of matter, it makes sense that they would want back-up opinions.

Doctors have been in trouble before for performing unnecessary hysterectomies so they'll want to be certain that all parties involved know exactly what the situation is.

My friend's mom has crippling endometriosis and they refuse to give her one. Even though they've already induced menopause to try to ease the pain and she's a 40 year old woman who's unquestionably capable of making her own decisions.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Is it really appropriate to post so much personal stuff on a public internet forum? Particularly about someone else who may not want their intimate details made so public?

 

[SciMal]

So, let's recap. It's been recommended that we stand trial to an ethics board, who ALWAYS rule in the "favor of the victim" (What victim? What favor?), which will likely result in her prolonged suffering due to her special needs, all because she has special needs.

I haven't been this genuinely pissed off in a while.

So, anyone want to explain how this crap works to me? Any other horror stories of this sort?

If nothing else, can I have cute cat videos? Me and my sister would appreciate it.

You haven't been shy about the fact she has special needs and that, while practically mentally sufficient, she's not quite to 100% of average. Now she has a major, MAJOR surgery ahead of her. Rarely are surgeries practically risk free, but this is a huge one. The uterus is a very large chunk of smooth muscle, and there will be complications. It also has the side-effect of removing any potential child-bearing ability. Your sister is fine with this, but...

The Doctor's duty is to BE ABSOLUTELY SURE that the surgery is made with consent, made with an understanding of the procedure, and made with an understanding of the outcome. There is no middle-ground for this shit. And all of that consent, understanding, and expectation of outcome can't be made by you - but by her.

Now, it has been an issue in several notorious cases in the past where a family tried (or succeeded) to have their disabled child castrated - eventually to be found out against the patient's will.

So, when the Doc goes to the Ethics committee, they are basically seeking to absolve themselves of responsibility if it turns out to be the case that your family is trying a similar tact. It doesn't really matter what YOU know, how YOU feel, and what YOU think should happen. The Doctor involved isn't part of your family, doesn't spend a lot of time with your family, and has a duty to your sister above everyone else in your family.

As much as this stings, the Doctor is doing what they think is best. They are making sure that the situation doesn't blow up in their face and HARM THEIR PATIENT more than what's already been done.

Yeah, it sucks, but if your sister is as capable as you say, has been in pain for as long as you say, and is otherwise fairly healthy - then the Ethics Board will probably find in her favor and she'll be able to get the operation done. It might take a little longer, but the relief will be worth it.

 

[lacktheknack]

No, it's not. Don't act like you know everything about our own situation. We've gotten the message, we know the reasons. There's not a thing the ethics board can do about messed up surgeries.

Except prevent unnecessary ones...

I'm in Canada, brah. They're covered for malpractice by the government. Not only that, but malpractice suits are rare here anyhow. We don't feel the need to reclaim $10,000,000 because the surgery is almost entirely paid for by the government.

And if surgeons are "worried they might have an accident", then that's pathetic in itself.

No, they are worried that self-righteous idiots who get offended that the whole world doesn't do exactly what they say when they say it will ask for an unnecessary surgery that can be complicated by certain factors that the patient already has, such as mental conditions or physical disabilities...

You know, you asked why they need to see a "Ethics Board" and then get all "You don't know me, how dare you say that" when I tried to explain that it isn't a reflection on you or them, just standard "cover your ass" medical practice designed to protect the patient, surgeon, hospital, and in your case, country from unnecessary harm and risk, be it physical or financial.

It sucks that your sister is in pain, but would you rather have her in pain, or dead from a surgery that wasn't necessary that went wrong. You do realize that patients can die from accidents that are no fault of the surgeon on completely routine procedures, right? The vagaries of the human body have that effect.

My mother had to sign a waiver for medical liability just for me to be put under when I was 8 getting my tonsils removed. If that isn't a routine procedure, then there is no such thing.

Yes, I got a bit hot-headed there. Sorry.

It still hurts that the "official reason" is that "we're likely manipulating her for purpose of eugenics", when we as a family think eugenics is an awful practice.

Is it really appropriate to post so much personal stuff on a public internet forum? Particularly about someone else who may not want their intimate details made so public?

My sister is aware of this thread and doesn't care. Quite frankly, we aren't afraid that someone's going to use this thread to track us down and... kind of annoy us?

On a different note, thanks to everyone for the cat videos. She likes them.

 

[Daveman]

You're a victim of the system, I know it just seems like they're trying to stop you but it really seems like this is just one of those things where these things have to happen just to ensure everything's good. From what you've said I expect they'll clear it all and it'll work out but yeah, it's annoying you've got to wait and see.

I don't like kittens but here's some christmas cheer in rap form.

 

[Quaxar]

It still hurts that the "official reason" is that "we're likely manipulating her for purpose of eugenics", when we as a family think eugenics is an awful practice.

No, it's a great concept, we just need to refocus and apply it to all the people who believe it is a good concept.

Is that really the official reason given to you or is it your interpretation? And if it should really be the official "official reason" I'm wondering from whom?
I also just realized that you never really told us your sister's approximate age which would also be quite relevant medically in such a decision like being underaged or near that.

 

[lacktheknack]

It still hurts that the "official reason" is that "we're likely manipulating her for purpose of eugenics", when we as a family think eugenics is an awful practice.

No, it's a great concept, we just need to refocus and apply it to all the people who believe it is a good concept.

Is that really the official reason given to you or is it your interpretation? And if it should really be the official "official reason" I'm wondering from whom?
I also just realized that you never really told us your sister's approximate age which would also be quite relevant medically in such a decision like being underaged or near that.

It's the reason we were told by the specialist.

And no, she's an undeniable adult.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

**lovecraftian horror snip**

Good fucking gods!

Okay, first of, there's absolutely nothing wrong with lopping out the female reproductive system if there is a problem with it. Cancer patients get this all the time.

How do I know this? My mom had uteran and ovarian cancer. They removed the whole system, put her on birth control pills to simulate her hormones, and she was cured and cancer free with no negative side effects (well, some cataracts, but laser eye surgery once a decade was a small price to pay for NO CANCER). When she turned 50, she tapered off the pills and gave herself artificial menopause.

So I'm utterly confused as to why this is even an issue. Is this a Canada thing? Because I've never heard of a simple hysterectomy going before an ethics board.

Also, why would a hysterectomy improve life for YOU, who are supposedly influencing her? The only person whose quality of life improves is her.

My suggestion? Come get the surgery done in America. I realize it's a bit strange to think of America being the more enlightened location compared to Canada, but really, this sounds like medical caution and oversight gone horribly wrong.

Edit: **reads the rest of thread, notes poster locations**

Okay, apparently it's an Europe thing that carried over to Canada. I think America must have been too Nazi-hating to get on the Eugenics thing back then. Or maybe just not in my area? Not sure.

I still think that coming to America for the surgery might be a way to get around this, if the board rules against you. Hopefully they won't - if so, this becomes a non-issue.

And again, I'll remind all readers - if the system is already broken, then there is no reason to leave it in. She can't have children naturally anyway, and she's keeping her ovaries, so not only is her uterus basically a useless lump of cramping flesh that causes only harm at this point BUT she can still have children so long as she keeps her ovaries and can find/hire a surrogate.

 

[Fluffythepoo]

My oldest brother is high functioning autistic, and weve had to go through ethics boards for some stuff before. In your case its practically a formality. The ethics board is just the screen used for mentally challenged people who are going for this caliber of surgery to make sure that it was indeed going to help the patient and not just the family. The ethics board just happens to be the vehicle for that step in the bureaucratic process. Youll go there, theyll see that its what she wants, its what the doctors say will help her, and then theyll send you on your way. So its just bureaucracy, not a doctor suspecting you of being evil or anything like that

 

[Schtoobs]

Sorry to hear that your sister is having such a harsh time, hearing things like that really puts things into perspective.

My advice is to maybe consider the possibility that they are just erring on the side of caution, not acting against you, but rather protecting your sister. Going to a trial like this and acting defensive could work against what your sister wants. Try to remember that you're there for her. It might make the feeling of being accused of manipulation or dishonesty easier to shrug off. These people most likely want the same thing you do, what's best for your sister.

Honest folk suffer these little injustices and slights so that people just like your sister don't suffer due to the choices of the selfish and cruel.