bladder had to stay...next???

I can agree with that. I thought initally that my husbands bladder should still come out, as that was the "Mother Ship" so to speak. My brother took my husbands Pathology reports, and scans and sent them to Johns Hopkins, and to Beth Israel via collegues in hopes of finding a surgeon. No Doctor would touch him. They all said surgery was no longer and option. That was all found out without my husband going under the knife.

Let me say it again--it would be better to get all the facts and perhaps another doctor's opinion on this before the lawyers are called in and the doctor is libeled on this forum.

I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. I'm just pointing out that perhaps we don't know the full story and that none of us are ever going to be called to the stand as expert witnesses, no matter how strong our opinions are or how many words we type in all capital letters.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that--in my opinion--it would be better to get all the facts and perhaps another doctor's opinion on this before the lawyers are called in and the doctor is libeled on this forum.

That's all. Marcus and Peggy might well have a case. If the doctor screwed up, he should be held accountable, and he will be.

I don't know the definitive answer to either of those questions. I know that I was told beforehand there was a chance that when I was opened up that if my invasive cancer was worse than they anticipated they might close me back up.

It will be very interesting to know what the next doctor says after reviewing all the details. I hope Peggy keeps us in the loop about this.

That's kind of my point. If a case is a difficult one--like your mom who was "overweight and a poor risk"--and the doctor attempts it and isn't successful the "Malpractice....Malpractice...Malpractice...." chorus is sung. (I'm not saying this applies to you, Joe, because you don't seem the kneejerk-lawsuit type, but you've certainly seen this philosophy.) If he doesn't take the case he's considered more worried about his stats than his patient's life.

That's a lose-lose formula for the doctor.

Let me again say how terribly sad I am about Marcus's situation. I can only imagine how, as a family, you feel.

But I'd also like to comment on how quickly the "Malpractice....Malpractice...Malpractice...." and "incompetence" and "let's publish his name here so no one will ever go to him again" card was played. In the fullness of time when all the facts are in, a lawsuit might well be in order. However, shouldn't we wait until we know the full story before we want to bring in lawyers and potentially libel someone?

At this point in time we certainly don't know all the details about the case. As Peggy said, medicine is an art and a science. And a lot of guesses and a lot of hopes. When I was at Norris a guy right down the hall was opened up, the doctors saw that the situation was beyond their control, and they closed him right back up. Should they have operated in the first place? Would his wife rather have known that they were willing to try or that they felt it was hopeless and that they'd rather not even attempt surgery. I don't know. It's totally situational.

I don't know if Marcus's doctor should or shouldn't have operated. Neither does anyone here. We don't have the doctor's perspective or his reasons for proceeding as he did.