4 posts shown.
urbanscout50 said:A surgeon really ought to respect a patient's request to skip local anesthesia, or at least coordinate with the anesthesiologist to combine local numbing with a lighter dose of general anesthesia. Especially when we're talking about a procedure that drags on forever and was already excruciatingly painful the last time around.
The patient has every right, while fully conscious and aware, to refuse any medical intervention—particularly one that could be performed in a much more "comfortable" and manageable way!
If a patient refuses local or regional anesthesia, that should be considered an absolute contraindication.
Furthermore, if the device they had implanted previously is functioning perfectly fine, doesn't that mean the risks associated with anesthesia are actually lower this time than they were before?
But then again, that's just how you surgeons operate, isn't it?
Of course, the patient can always go looking for a different specialist, though perhaps they should have done that much sooner. The catch is, what happens if this specific surgeon is the only one in the country who performs these types of implantations? In that case, they're essentially stuck with him.
Everything went smoothly this time, and they were actually merciful enough to use "general anesthesia."
thanks again
Alright, so urbanscout50 can certainly insist on his way, but does the surgeon actually have any obligation to go along with it?
Are there specific patient rights regarding this situation—if the doctor refuses to sign off on a general consent, what exactly is the patient entitled to know so they aren't left flying blind?
And is it even possible to request a different surgeon at this stage, or is it already too late since the hospital admission is happening today?
😕
urbanscout50 said:If there aren't any medical reasons to avoid general anesthesia, she should sit down with the surgeon and insist on going under. It’s vital that she explicitly mentions that previous nightmare with local anesthesia and how they handled the entire procedure while she was still awake.
But isn't this the exact same surgeon who performed the first operation? 😱He went back to the same guy, and honestly, I don't think there's much point in explaining things again when he already had to listen to my father shouting at him for two hours straight during the last one.
I doubt there are any other options left on the table; I'll tell her to push for it, though she already tried asking, only to be told that it would be too risky.😕
thanks, urbanscout50
Hello everyone
My father finally underwent heart surgery after waiting nearly a decade for it.
Specifically, he had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) installed because his arrhythmias were so severe that the only thing capable of bringing him back to life was immediate emergency intervention from doctors using external paddles.
It happened three times—he even experienced what they call clinical death once—and I am only mentioning this to convey the sheer gravity of the situation, the trauma, and the shock he has been living through since childhood due to a rare and insufficiently researched heart muscle disease.
After years of being the subject of various medical "experiments"—there have actually been books written about cases like his—and enduring countless unsuccessful treatments and attempts,
that day finally arrived; the device meant to solve his greatest lifelong struggle was ready for implantation.
Everything would have been simple if our family hadn't spent two months essentially badgering him to agree to the procedure... and then, in a state of disbelief, he grabbed his pajamas and belongings and headed to the hospital, frustrated as ever.
Since the surgery was high-risk, we sat there waiting for the doctor's call like we were sitting on needles, half-driven mad by the suspense.
The call finally came, and the doctor said the surgery lasted 2.5 hours and everything went fine—we all wept with relief at that moment.
But later that same afternoon, after having visited his room to kiss him and check in, his very first words to us were, "If I had known it would feel like this, I never would have agreed; I would have rather just died."
What on earth happened?
Before the procedure, they strapped him to the table and gave him some local anesthetic that only seemed to hold its effect for about 20 minutes. For the rest of the time ("roughly 2 hours"), the surgeon was essentially working on him while he was conscious, reaching through the scalpel incision to thread the leads to the heart and eventually tucking the device under the skin.
There were complications during the operation and while extracting the leads—which have anchor-like tips—meaning when they go in, they are difficult to pull back out, leading to more issues because of a surgical error.
I could hardly listen to him anymore; I felt a profound sense of guilt because I was one of the people who pressured him into undergoing this operation.
To make matters worse, several months have passed, and the wound isn't healing, and the site where the device sits remains painful—just another layer of frustration!
A few days ago, we finally convinced him to go back for a follow-up with the surgeon who performed the procedure.
He barely managed to get there, only for the doctor to tell him that the device was implanted too shallowly and that everything must be redone immediately!
So, people, please help me: is it acceptable for a man in his condition to demand general anesthesia instead of just local, and does he even have the right to request that? The doctor isn't exactly communicative, so what are his actual rights in this entire mess?
Beyond that, we are seeing deep frustration, nervousness, and a genuine loathing and fear toward hospitals manifesting in him.
Any perspective you can offer would be greatly appreciated.