Some might wonder why I don't disclose real names here. I do have a right to do so but I choose not to. I will leave that for others to do. For the following text I have altered real names expect in the case of naming Dr. Hufnagel and myself.
My purpose of having this 2nd surgery was to gather proof and information to present to the IL court in support of my case against Dr.X , the Illinois doctor who had performed my tubal ligation (TL). I knew at that time (of the 2nd surgery) that Dr. X has had caused my menopause at the time of my TL surgery and knew that I needed more proof to show and prove my case in court.
Women have sued doctors in the past for becoming pregnant after a TL (having the TL fail), but there is no case law on file such as the suit that I had filed. There are no cases (that I found) where a woman sued her doctor for not informing her of the risks of a tubal ligation and for causing her a hormonal imbalance (or for causing her surgical menopause at the time of her TL.)
I believe at the time of my 2nd surgery and I believe to this to this day that I was castrated at the time of my TL. I know this is true. This is also the belief of Dr. Hufnagel, other doctors who've been employed for my health care, my husband and family, and hundreds of others who have herd my story or who have had similar events happen to them personally after their TL. What happened to me is NOT an isolated case. Dr. Hufnagel reports seeing and treating hundreds of women who were castrated by their TL, and she herself as well as other doctors have been vocal and have written about these types of side effects caused by tubal ligation surgeries.
How Dr. Hufnagel differs from these other doctors is she was and still is willing to testify to this in a court of law. This trait in Dr. Hufnagel has caused her great fame and great pain. Dr. Hufnagel is a woman's health rights activist and a doctor who is not afraid to break rank and blow the whistle. She has exposed and spoken out on many crimes and abuses that have taken place within the medical and health comminutes. This breaking rank and whistle blowing included cases against individual doctors who have injured one woman as well as against whole medical communities who have injured (and are injuring) many. She can not be bought, does not crumble, and she tells the truth.
Dr. Hufnagel exposed to the world when she wrote No More Hysterectomies that the medical community was performing hundreds of thousands of hysterectomies each year on women unnecessarily. She exposed that polio shots for new born children could be harmful especially in cases of preemies and exposed that big corporations were harming women by experimenting with silicon plugs used to sterilize women. She was instrumental in creating the first informed consent laws for hysterectomies in CA, TX, and NY, and is currently working with the Coalition for Post Tubal Women to get the first informed consent laws passed for TL's in Illinois. This list is just a small portion of issues she's spoken out about and actions she's been involved with.
When Dr. Hufnagels book No More Hysterectomies came out there began a smear campaign to have her license removed. She better explains the events that happened and I leave her the honors of doing so. This new campaign of exposing the issues of information being withheld from women at the time of their TL's has only re-sparked and added fuel to the smear campaign that began against her years ago.
She is slandered, made out to be a liar, is said to be not educated, and more. The truth is she's brilliant, truthful, has the same quality medical education and training that all her peers have, and she is a women's health right's activist. Because she's for women's rights, and for informing women, this has not gained her popularity amongst certain groups and organizations who have been repressing information from women. Groups such as the ACOG and their repressing information from women about the true risks of TLs.
The
malpractice, negligence, and crimes that were committed against me happens to hundred of thousands of women each year. When I speak of this happening I mean that information is withheld at the time of their TL surgery, and women are NEVER informed afterwards. Women are NEVER told at the time of being put on the pill and at the time of 2nd surgeries/surgical procedures that their TL surgery caused their condition that necessitated this type of medical protocol/treatment. Women simply are not told at the time of their D&C's, hysterectomies, and other 2nd surgical procedures that "your TL caused this condition".I too was told, and I am still being told by some doctors as well as by the ACOG that my TL did not cause my condition and that TL's do not cause conditions such as mine. This is part of the code of silence.
The following is a condensed version of events that happened just prior, during and after the time of my 2nd surgery. I present this here to better explain why I filed legal suit on the CA doctor (whom I'll call Dr. Cut). It's shows and demonstrates what lengths the medical community will go to cover and halt the exposure that tubal ligations (TL's) cause menopause. It also demonstrates what lengths doctors will go to protect each other.
Events that happened before the "2nd surgery"
Once I knew that I for sure was going to LA for this 2nd surgery I started contacting more lawyers. Chicago area lawyers did not want my case because of it being based on "causation" and because it would be fought in DuPage county. Lawyers were being told (by their experts - direct peers of Dr. X) that yes my TL could have caused my menopause condition but that proving this in a court of law would be difficult. The defendants defense would fight it to the end. This meant that the case would cost lots of money. Being I was a woman (and not worth as much as a man to lawyers as far as settlements go), and that the case would cost lots of money to fight, no one wanted my case. Lawyers are lawyers to make money and win cases. This was why I was wanted to get more information and proof for my case.
I was (and still am) upset and angered that I had not been informed of this risk and that I had been castrated without warning. I was upset and angered that Dr. X in order to protect himself caused me more harm and suffering as I experienced bone loss and fell into hormone shock when all along the means to diagnosis and treatment for my condition was available. Once I learned that I was going to have this "discovery" surgery I began to call lawyers looking for someone to represent me. I explained that I was about to undergo a 2nd surgery and would soon have proof to prove the case.
One lawyer who I had contacted way in the beginning of this legal battle, and who wasn't interested in my case at that time, was now very interested when I called with this information. I questioned this lawyer about his medical expert witness and who would be seeing this information because I was quickly learning that even though Chicago is a very big place, everyone in the ob-gyn community knows each other. Lawyers never disclose who they are passing information on to, but this lawyer told me that their firms expert witness was his brother in law, that he was very good and highly respected and that they used him in a lot of cases. I was under distress being with out a lawyer and wanted to find someone interested in the case before I left to have the surgery. I had court dates coming up and wanted representation as soon as possible when I returned. On the phone we set an appointment for me to come to his office to explain my case.
My husband John came with me to this meeting. When we arrived we by a female lawyer, Ms. L Doe (not her real name...) She told us that the lawyer I had made the appointment with couldn’t meet with us and that she was a lawyer and would be taking my case history for everyone at the firm to review. My husband and I sat down with her and explained everything that had happened to date from beginning to end. She was also given verbal and printed medical documents/information about everyone I had seen up to that date... Dr. X, Dr. Lu (a local expert who that stated that he would testify on my behalf), Dr. Hart, Dr. Jenny, Dr. Boe... etc (again, not real names here) She was given information about all events that had happened up until that point and also explained that Dr. Hufnagel had also done my review and was also willing to testify.We gave her the whole 9 yards.
She asked questions such as why we were not also bringing suit against my family doctor for not diagnosing my condition, and asked questions about my upcoming surgery such as who was doing the surgery, when the surgery would be, etc... We sat there and told and explained everything to her honestly. At the end of this meeting Ms. Doe appeared extremely interested and wanted me to contact her as soon as I got back from LA. She understood that this 2nd surgery would provide defiant proof for the case.
LA Meeting
I met with Dr Cut for the first time in person on 7-20-98.
At this office meeting issues surrounding the surgery were again discussed.
Also, I had brought along a surgical photo I was given in 95' at the time of my TL to show Dr. Cut how my ovaries looked at the time of that surgery, (before they were injured). I wanted him to have a visual of how they looked less than 3 years before that date. He looked at the picture and returned it to me.
I was billed $250 for this "office consultation" which I wrote a personal check. I also gave him on that day the certified check for $2,000 that was required by him to be paid up front.
The "Surgery"
On 7-21-98 I arrived at CA Hospital, checked in, had blood work done, (again FSH and LH), chest x-ray, and was taken to the surgery. I never saw Dr. Cut that day (while I was awake) before or after the surgery.
After the surgery (out patient), I went back to hotel with the understanding that I would be meeting Dr. Cut on 7-23-98 to discuss the surgery.
Events that happened after the surgery
On Thursday, 7-23-98 my mother and I arrived at Dr. Cut's office before he arrived. His female partner/program coordinator/office manager asked us (my mother and I) if we wanted to view the tape before he got there. We said yes and she took us into an examining room with a TV/VCR and started the tape. The whole document was very short (less than 3 minutes) that showed both the laperscopy (view of interior of uterus, vaginally) and the lap surgery (internal).
Soon afterwards Dr.Cut arrived, spoke with his office manager and then met with my mother and myself. With both of us present he asked if we had any questions about the tape. I told him that "I didn’t think that my ovaries looked right and they look like I expected them to look…" and told him that I wanted to know, "his opinion".
He played the tape again for us explaining all along how normal my ovaries looked and how everything appeared o.k. I was in shock as he narrated how normal everything looked as my mother and I watched the tape for the 2nd time. I couldn't believe that he though they looked normal because they didn't look normal at all, and nothing what they looked like compared to the photo that was given to me at the time of my TL. I thought to myself that when the pathology report came back from the lab that Dr Cut would see that he was mistaken.... The only thing he mentioned during the playing of this tape as far as the previous TL surgery was that I had adenomyosis. He told us that this was common after a TL and since I had read Dr. Hufnagels book that already knew this....
He went on to tell me (with my mother present) that I should never mention that the tape was made because he didn’t think it would help with my IL legal case (why should this matter to him?), He told me that he wasn’t going to mention that the tape existed and was not going to make reference to it in my medical record.
I told him that I thought my ovaries looked atrophic and he said, "No", that if they were atrophic ovaries that, "they would be black." (For he record, atrophic ovaries are white- stark white - normal ovaries are pinkish and this statement he made to us was false)
He escorted my mother out, stating that he needed to examine me. He looked at my stomach and at my surgical wounds form the surgery and told me to leave the surgical tape on (no stitches) until it fell off. I was still in shock that he was telling me misinformation.
I questioned him again about how my ovaries appeared on he tape and told him that it was my understanding that atrophic ovaries were white and that black ovaries were another type of condition when the ovary twists...
At this he blew up and started yelling at me, waving his arms, and very aggressively told me that I was wrong, that I didn’t know anything and that I shouldn’t read so much... This outburst frightened me and I became scared (very scared) that he might hurt me. It was very alarming, I was very frightened and I clamed up.
He regained is composure and told me he didn’t know why my FSH and LH were so high, and told me he thought it might be "chemical".
I asked him about my lab/pathology reports from the surgery and he said that nothing had come back yet and that I would have to wait for those.
I was very confused, under the influence of narcotic pain medication that he had prescribed for me, scared because he had just blown up at me and upset because he was not going to give me my tape. I was numb that he was telling me one thing, when I knew that it was the other. It was almost as if he was telling me I was crazy.
He escorted me to the front desk and I was presented with a bill for the balance of the surgery. I was angry and frightened. At that point he showed me two photos and stated that "you don’t want these". I told him "yes I did" and took them. He then said that I should take a look and then "discard and destroy them" He made it very clear that I should "never show the photo's to anyone".
I left his office with two photos, but no tape. I had no knowledge that he had NOT performed a biopsy and believed that when the lab report came back he'd alter his thinking. I left his office under the impression thinking that he had performed a biopsy of each of my ovaries and that he had removed a cyst that was seen on one of my ovaries.
On the way to the airport I called his office and spoke with his partner. I told her that I didn’t care if Dr. Cut thought I shouldn’t mention the tape, that I wanted a copy if it. She then returned the call directly to my IL home and spoke with my husband.
When I got home I forwarded copies of the photos to Dr. Hufnagel and explained what had happened in LA. She stated to me that the photo's showed classic atrophic ovaries (meaning their blood supply was cut from them). She stated she didn't understand why Dr.Cut said what he said, and why he didn't provide me with a copy of the tape. She said that the tape, the photos, and the lab/pathology reports would all be VERY useful in my IL case.
It was obvious that something wasn't right. It was never said to me in so many words but it appeared that "something was going down".... It wasn't made clear to me about the biopsy, and I had no idea what was going on or what had just happened.
Back Home from LA, LA Land...
I was in shock and disbelief. I had just flown 2000 miles away to get and obtain information and proof for a court cause, had a surgery, and came home with nothing and was being told nothing.
I started writing letters to Dr.Cut and Mr. HR/CA Hospital demanding both my medical records and the tape. I put a stop on the personal check I had written to Dr. Cut for my office consultation ($250), I contacted my insurance company and told them not to pay on any of the bills, etc... Dr. Hufnagel arbitrated and she can better explain what transpired as far as phone calls, what was said and so on.....
As time went on it became evident that I was not going to get my tape or my medical records. I wanted a copy of the tape, but even more so a copy of the pathology report from my biopsied ovaries. It was my right to have my medical records and they were not sending them to me. I contacted and employed Detective PI who was successful in getting my both my tape and my medical records.
The tape that detective PI sent me is the same tape my mother and I saw in his office. The still photos’ of the ovaries that Dr. Cut had given me (but told me to destroy) do match the ovaries on the video tape. The tape was said to be of me when given to the detective. I was not made aware of what Dr. Cut had wrote in his post operative report until the detective sent it to me.
Although Dr. Hufnagel hinted that something was amiss, I had no conclusive knowledge that Dr Cut had NOT performed a biopsy and that there was NOT a pathology report with my records until I received these records and the surgical report from the detective.
Dr. Hufnagel did more review for my IL case after receiving the information (medical records/tape) from this 2nd surgery. She stated that from the visuals that yes, my ovaries appeared to be atrophic, and that she does see where damage was done to my ovaries blood supply. Her findings were still that the TL did cause my menopause, only now she did this with even more assurance.
She had other comments about my care, but this was regarding the 2nd surgery. Her findings are that Dr. Cut was negligent.....
Dr. Cut wrote that nothing was wrong, there is no record of a biopsy or a pathology report to support that my ovaries are o.k. or to support his statements, and the visual and my labs do not support what he wrote in the least.
Another ob-gyn viewed the tape (but does not want to become involved in my IL or my CA suite) and stated to me upon viewing the tape that my ovaries looked very small, non-functional and atrophic.
Dr. Cut knew before this surgery that my ovaries were non-functional so how could he state in a post operative report that they are o.k? He already had the knowledge that they were not functioning....
Dr. Cut knowingly made false medical records. He reported I had normal ovaries and ovarian function when he saw atrophied and non-functional ovaries. He was aware prior to this surgery that I had an elevated FSH. Despite the visual and laboratory evidence my ovaries were non-functional he reported them to be functional. This creation of a false medical record was done with intent to cause me harm directly and indirectly. He knew that this action would interfere with an existing litigation and cause my case to be negatively affected.
He knew that I was under distress and performed the surgery on me with no intentions of doing the biopsy/ providing me with a pathology report, or giving me any visuals. He took my money and my insurance's money and he and the hospital profited from this surgery.
The visuals do not match up with his post op report. when he’s looking at my fallopian tubes from within my uterus. He reports that my tubes are free and open, but they are not open because I had a tubal ligation. It's shown that they are not open with the visuals. His report makes absolutely no sense at all and it's shown on the video tape that they are not open. He makes reference that the veins looked o.k., but does not provide a visual to support this, and the the visuals he does provides shows that veins were cut and damaged.
Events that relate back the lawyer meeting I had before going to LA
When I returned from LA I learned that Ms. L Doe's law firm had already made a decision not to take my case. They had composed and sent their rejection letter the day I had left for LA. They did this with out waiting on the findings that would have come from the surgery. I thought that this was strange that their medical expert wouldn’t have waited to see the results and findings from this surgery. My husband and I had made it really clear to the her that after the surgery there wouldn’t be a question anymore. It was as if they couldn’t drop me fast enough and it didn’t set right with me. (See copy of letter***)
This letter, and it’s timing, prompted me to begin searching on the internet to see what I could find. By the time I started researching this I had already received my records from the Private Investigator I started looking around the internet. What I was looking for I didn’t know, but thought maybe something might click. Something did.
I typed in the name of the TL doctor, Dr. X and was able to locate him as being on staff at a local area hospital which I’ll call Len Hospital. He was listed (and even pictured) there along with a long list of other ob-gyn’s. I noticed that his partner, Dr. ob Moy was listed and I just kind of looked around.
All of a sudden I saw a Dr. obgyn Doe listed as a peer of Dr. X’s. I could not believe it. Could that have been the lawyers brother in law? Was the male lawyer that I spoke to married to Ms. Doe and that could be her brother? Or could Ms. Doe be his sister, and she is married to Dr. Doe? I don’t’ know what the relationship is, but it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out and everything started to make sense.
Could have Dr.obgyn Doe have passed information on to Dr. X that I was about to have a 2nd surgery? Of course he's not supposed to but does that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. To what lengths will doctors go to protect one and another and to protect their interests within the organizations that they belong to? Could Dr. Doe have passed the information on to Dr. Moy (Dr. X's partner) who then passed it on to either Dr. X or on to their lawyers? Who else could this information have been passed on to?
Could someone have contacted Dr. Cut about me and requested, demanded, or paid him to alter the findings? Does stuff like this happen? Do doctors get paid off, or get paid off to write false documents? I asked Dr. Hufnagel if things like this ever happened and she told me yes, all the time.
I’ve since asked area lawyers about the connection between these lawyers and the doctors involved and their responses lead me to believe that these connections to be true. When I found this information on the internet I felt as though I witnessed incest. I had a hard time believing what I was seeing was true. You don't want to believe that this type of stuff happens. It's like finding a video tape of your husband with a baby sitter. You just don't think like stuff like that happens until you see it with your own eyes. Once I learned this information from the internet many pieces of the puzzle fell into place.
I believe that Dr Cut's action of doing "nothing" at the time of my 2nd surgery and his creation of a false medical record was done with intent to cause me harm directly and indirectly. He knew that I was involved in a court action and that this action would interfere with the existing litigation and that his actions would cause my case to be negatively affected.I believe that he performed this 2nd surgery on me with no intentions of ever doing the biopsy, providing me with a pathology report, giving me visuals, and with no intentions of doing anything. He took my money and he and the hospital profited from the surgery.
I also believe that Dr. Cut as well as CA Hospital was contacted by Dr. X, Dr X's lawyers, and or the organizations that Dr. X belongs to. I believe that Dr. Cut conspired with Dr. X, Dr.X's lawyers, and or the organizations that Dr. X's belongs to with the sole purpose of jeopardizing my IL court case, to harm the case, and to halt the exposure the case was about to bring to hundreds of thousands of women.
Fool me once, shame on you... Fool
me twice...
or...
Susan becames a victim a second time!
Only this time it was a cover-up!
Here is a copy of the court papers filed on Dr. Cut on my behalf.
Feedback
Coalition For Post Tubal
Women
Copyright © 1999
The following is from the outline that I sent to the CA lawyer in order so that I could file suit on Dr. Cut.
My name, address, phone #, etc.... Plaintiff
Dr. Cut's "real name", address, phone #, etc.... 1st Defendant
*CA Hospital's name, address, phone #, etc... 2nd Defendant
Hospital Representative (HR) name, etc... 3rd Defendant
Head Administer / Owner?/President name, etc... 4th Defendant
Plus others to be named.....
Surgery took place 7-21-98 at CA Hospital, performed by Dr.Cut
Reason for going to LA and having surgery with Dr. Cut was to obtain information and proof for an IL court case I was involved in. (The IL case was filed on 4-13-98)
Issues (in this case) are:
Consent – (lack of)
Fraud
Malpractice
Negligence
Creation of False records
Intentional misrepresentationWhat I understood what was going to happen at my 7-21-98 surgery, and what I agreed to was the following:
Prior to my arrival in LA, Dr. Cut and CA Hospital knew:
Prior to my going to LA and consenting to the surgery:
The surgery he promotes at his web site is ... explained as being a specialized "female" surgery and that he is the director of this hospital program. From his web site I thought that he was a top specialist in women’s health.
Dr. Hufnagel, whom my lawyer had hired to do a medical review for my IL case suggested that I go to Dr Cut to have this surgery done. She suggested that I go to this doctor when I asked her if she knew of a doctor who would help me. At the time she wasn't practicing in CA because of being stripped of her privileges and it also wouldn't be proper for an expert witness to operate on a plaintiff.
It was my decision to have this surgery being under distress and wanting to get the best information and proof I could for my case and the IL court. I heavily researched which medical tests or procedures would give me the best information and evidence. I researched dye x-ray tests to show that the blood was not going were it was suppose to go (to my ovaries), MRI's, MRA's, and so on. I learned that these types of tests might show evidence, but that the best evidence would be a biopsy of my ovaries. Both Dr. Hufnagel and Dr Cut agreed.
Both Dr Cut and CA Hospital was made aware that the information from this surgery would be used to move my "causation" case to a "proved" case in IL by both me and Dr. Hufnagel. She spoke to them about my case prior to my surgery and all parties involved were full aware of all the circumstances.
Dr Cut instructed me to send medical documentation to his office. I sent my labs (FSH and LH) showing I was postmenopausal, and my ultra-sound reports. I was told by him that he would remove any cysts if he found any (because cysts on post menopausal ovaries were not normal), and regardless of what he found that he would perform a tissue biopsy on both of my ovaries to obtain a pathology report for my court case and that he would also document with video and photos what had happened at the tubal ligation. (What veins were cut, etc…) I was told that I would be required to give him $2,000 up front, in the form of a cashiers check the day before the surgery, and that I should expect to remain in LA for 4 days/3 nights.
I called the hospital and spoke with Mr HR about my surgery. I made the requested that the surgery be aired on the internet and was told no. I then requested that Dr. Hufnagel be present during the surgery because I had retained her for consult, she refereed me, and because she was doing my legal/medical review. I was told no. I then request that Dr. Hufnagel be able to view the surgery, via a computer/phone line connection while the surgery took place. Again I was told no.
Mr. HR told me how great Dr.Cut was, and how he always had a surgical assistant with him. Mr. HR gave me the name of a doctor and said that this doctor would be assisting Dr. Cut. (this person I've learned is on staff at CA hospital but was not present nor was any assistant surgeon present at the time of my surgery with Dr. Cut.) MR. HR with telling me this overall pacified me from my requested that Dr. Hufnagel be able to view the surgery. Mr. HR told me that I’d be in good hands with Dr. Cut and told me that he was one of their top specialists.
Both Dr Cut and Mr HR both knew and understood that I was in the middle of a medical malpractice case, that I was in distress about how my case was going, and that I needed documentation. They both knew and understood that Dr. Hufnagel was my expert witness, that she refereed me to them, that she would be reviewing the findings of that 2nd surgery for my IL court case, and that she would also be "on record" as to what her opinion was as to the findings of that 2nd surgery with all that came from the surgery. (Pathology, and visual).