• tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Also someone should look into a the doctor that performed the surgery without any medical necessity.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      5 months ago

      It was a choice MOST medical amputees get: Do you want a fucked up limb or want it gone?

      No injury heals perfectly even in children, let alone adults. It is a perfectly reasonable question where amputation can lead to LESS pain and suffering in the future.

      • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Fair enough, maybe saying “without any medical necessity” was over the top here.

        Still, it very much seems like the decision was motivated by the desire to particapate in the Olympics. The medically sound thing would be to try and fix the finger and amputate it when it doesn’t work out.

        But of course information is limited and it’s all speculation. Still, an ethics investigation would seem appropriate in my opinion.

        • Alue42@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Please read my other comment, as someone with actual first hand experience in hand injuries that result in the choice between restorative surgery or amputation.

          You make that choice when deciding which way to go initially. It’s not a painting that you can decide "ya know what, this isn’t working out, let’s go back to the other way we thought ". Once you go down the restorative surgery route, that’s your route. And any pain you experience gets dealt with medically. Believe me, I’ve tried telling every doctor I know that the nerve pain I experience is to much to much to bear and to please go back and amputate instead, but at this point it’s considered an elective amputation.

          Just because he’s explaining that a benefit of this choice is that he can play doesn’t mean it was the complete reason for his choice

          • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I get your point and you also pointed out in your other reply that we don’t know all the information here.

            I had “stenosing tenosynovitis” as a child. And while it can resolve itself, my parents opted for the surgery. And it worked out fine. Yes, it’s not quite the same, but people have different expirences.

            That’s exactly why I think there needs to be some kind of investigation.

            • Alue42@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              5 months ago

              Completely disagree. If this had happened at any other time other than two weeks before the games and he made the same decision, would you also be saying there needs to be an investigation?

              This was such a severe injury that looking at it caused him to pass out. It’s not like it was a simple fracture and the time to heal would have caused him to miss the game so he strong armed someone into amputation. This was such a severe injury that amputation was a viable option, and that’s what he chose.