Lawton resident can't find a doctor who will amputate festering limb

D

dreama

New Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,010
Reaction score
0
Lawton resident can't find a doctor who will amputate festering limb

LAWTON — Scott Foster wants to regain his independence so bad that he's willing to sacrifice his leg.

Scott Foster, 38, suffers from a blood disorder that prevents wounds from healing and he has developed large open sores. Photo by JIM BECKEL, THE OKLAHOMAN

If only he could find a doctor who'd amputate.
Foster, 38, suffers from a rare blood disorder that doesn't allow him to heal from simple cuts and sores. And what began as a mosquito bite eight years ago has grown into a painful, festering leg wound that looks like a shark bite.

Foster said the pain is unbearable. Even worse, it's stripped him of a once active life. He wants a prosthetic leg in the hopes of rebuilding his independence, but doctors won't take off his right leg.

"They say I'm too young and as long as there's a pulse in my foot, they won't," he said. "They're into saving limbs, not getting rid of them."

His stride has been reduced to a hobble and he can no longer do things he once enjoyed, like dancing and biking.

A former business owner, Foster can't work and relies on Social Security and his parents for financial assistance. He moved in with his folks in Lawton about three years ago and passes the days with television and crosswords.

"I want to be able to work again and live on my own," Foster said. "This isn't just about my leg — it's about my spirit, too."

He said five years ago, he never would have considered amputation.

He's undergone vein procedures, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, repeated surgeries to dissolve blood clots in his leg and more than a dozen skin grafts.

"I've had some of the best medical care available to man, but I don't feel my leg is ever going to fully heal," Foster said.

He said his Oklahoma City doctor asked he postpone speaking with The Oklahoman about his desire for an amputation. He has an appointment May 1 with a Dallas specialist.

"My doctor says there is a possibility it might work," Foster said. "And there is a possibility that if my leg is amputated, the stump won't heal."

Linda Foster said her son's blood disorder is a genetic disease he inherited through her family. Her father and other relatives have suffered from it and ultimately had legs amputated to improve their quality of life.

"If he were a dog or horse or any other animal, they would show compassion and amputate his leg," Linda Foster said.

View pictures of the diseased leg
Click to expand...

More Pics and article:

http://www.newsok.com/lawton-reside.../article/3363568?custom_click=masthead_topten

http://tinyurl.com/cjmm4k

I can't understand why they don't just cut his leg off. If that's what he wants.
 
that what I thought. you have all these veins flowing that may never heal.. it is better to let it flow where it need to be. If he is not healing from a simple bug big, you bet he will have greater pain if they cut it off. What they need to do is find treatment that will help him heal.
 
jillio said:
Because if he has a blood disorder that prevents wounds from healing, a surgical wound will not heal either.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of that but this quote changed my mind: "Linda Foster said her son's blood disorder is a genetic disease he inherited through her family. Her father and other relatives have suffered from it and ultimately had legs amputated to improve their quality of life."
 
Buffalo said:
I was thinking of that but this quote changed my mind: "Linda Foster said her son's blood disorder is a genetic disease he inherited through her family. Her father and other relatives have suffered from it and ultimately had legs amputated to improve their quality of life."
Click to expand...

Yes, it may be possible that he will eventually have to have an amputation. But he still has a pulse in his foot, which means that the blood is still pumping, and there is the chance to heal the wound he has. An amputation would be much harder to heal. Plus, amputating a limb that is still functional is an ethical issue. I'm certain that the doctors are postponing any amputations because the the risk involved, so they don't want to do it until they absolutely have to. For the patient's sake.
 
If this man wants to truly risk this, with out a malpractice suit. He probably needs to take it up to the Judge in the Court of Law.

If it helps him with the quality of life. Then go for it.

If this only affect his legs, and not his upper extremities. :dunno:

Hard to say. I would have to understand more about what is effecting him.
 
jillio said:
Because if he has a blood disorder that prevents wounds from healing, a surgical wound will not heal either.
Click to expand...

This is true. As awful as this probably is, a surgical wound would be much, much worse.

Given my own experience with non-healing wounds, I wonder if a wound vac might not help him?

This is what a Wound Vac is:

http://www.kci1.com/82.asp
 
Last edited:
My ex's boss has two usless fingers. My ex thinks he should have those two fingers amputed because they get in the way whenever he buttons his shirt, etc. I am inclined to agree with that but on the other hand - what if the doctors found a way to resurrect those nerves?
 
It's his limb so I feel it should be his choice as to what he should do about it. It's strange that doctors will alow you to kill somebody but they won't allow you to cut off a limb that is causing you major discomfort.
 
dreama said:
It's his limb so I feel it should be his choice as to what he should do about it. It's strange that doctors will alow you to kill somebody but they won't allow you to cut off a limb that is causing you major discomfort.
Click to expand...

Could you please explain what do you mean by "doctors will alow you to kill somebody"?
 
dreama said:
It's his limb so I feel it should be his choice as to what he should do about it. It's strange that doctors will alow you to kill somebody but they won't allow you to cut off a limb that is causing you major discomfort.
Click to expand...

He can amputate his own limb if he chooses to. But he does not have the right to force a physician to do it for him if the physician judges it not to be in his best interest medically. "Do no harm" is the principle of nonmaleficense. Doctors must adhere to that. And since they have spent the time and money being educated and trained to make that determination, that is who should be making it. I'm sure if the guy is serious about it, he could find some back alley surgeon who doesn't give a dang about ethical principles to do it for him, but he will probably end up dead from the complications.
 
jillio said:
He can amputate his own limb if he chooses to. But he does not have the right to force a physician to do it for him if the physician judges it not to be in his best interest medically. "Do no harm" is the principle of nonmaleficense. Doctors must adhere to that. And since they have spent the time and money being educated and trained to make that determination, that is who should be making it. I'm sure if the guy is serious about it, he could find some back alley surgeon who doesn't give a dang about ethical principles to do it for him, but he will probably end up dead from the complications.
Click to expand...

One of the general surgery risks is obese. The rule for bypass surgery is one have to be obese in order to get the surgery and the surgery can cure type 2 diabetes. I am not even obese. That is where I think the doctors aren't keeping their "do no harm" oath. The risks for diabetes are far more dangerous than the risks for malnurtrion. Why wait until I am so fat that I would have two risks to worry about when undergo the surgery instead of worry about just one risk. Maybe three risks if obese causes bad heart.
 
Buffalo said:
One of the general surgery risks is obese. The rule for bypass surgery is one have to be obese in order to get the surgery and the surgery can cure type 2 diabetes. I am not even obese. That is where I think the doctors aren't keeping their "do no harm" oath. The risks for diabetes are far more dangerous than the risks for malnurtrion. Why wait until I am so fat that I would have two risks to worry about when undergo the surgery instead of worry about just one risk. Maybe three risks if obese causes bad heart.
Click to expand...

Because the side effects from GI by-pass surgery can be fatal. I personally have a friend who died from consequences of the surgery. And the risk for malnutrition is just as great. You are just creating more risk. The difference being, the risk with the diabetes is already there. Doctors doing the surgery when it isn't necessary is a risk created by doing the surgery. And doing by-pass surgery on someone who is less than obese creates even more risk for complication than doing the surgery on someone who is obese. That is where the do no harm comes in. Doing the surgery under the conditions you describe creates greater risk of harm than does the diabetes that you have. And the doctors did not create the diabetes, therefore, they did not create harm.

Additionally, GI by-pass surgery is not approved as a treatment for diabetes. It is approved as a treatment for obesity.
 
jillio said:
He can amputate his own limb if he chooses to. But he does not have the right to force a physician to do it for him if the physician judges it not to be in his best interest medically. "Do no harm" is the principle of nonmaleficense. Doctors must adhere to that. And since they have spent the time and money being educated and trained to make that determination, that is who should be making it. I'm sure if the guy is serious about it, he could find some back alley surgeon who doesn't give a dang about ethical principles to do it for him, but he will probably end up dead from the complications.
Click to expand...


that's right. The doctor should not feel forced to do something that make him extremely uncomfortable.
 
dreama said:
It's his limb so I feel it should be his choice as to what he should do about it. It's strange that doctors will alow you to kill somebody but they won't allow you to cut off a limb that is causing you major discomfort.
Click to expand...

jillio said:
He can amputate his own limb if he chooses to. But he does not have the right to force a physician to do it for him if the physician judges it not to be in his best interest medically. "Do no harm" is the principle of nonmaleficense. Doctors must adhere to that. And since they have spent the time and money being educated and trained to make that determination, that is who should be making it. I'm sure if the guy is serious about it, he could find some back alley surgeon who doesn't give a dang about ethical principles to do it for him, but he will probably end up dead from the complications.
Click to expand...

Like Jillio said, there are implications to going thru with the amputation. While I fully appreciate this man's discomfort, no doctor is going to do a procedure that is not in the patients best interest.

Interestingly enough, when I was bedridden three years ago with non-healing and infected bedsores, we were hard-pressed to find a doctor who was willing to operate on me due to insurance issues. Luckily for me, my internist located a plastic surgeon who was willing to take my case pro-bono. I would have died had this doctor been unwilling to treat me. But that is not the case here. The doctor's treating this man know more than we do, and probably are leery about amputating due to risk of death to this man. I would not second guess these doctors. They are the ones who went to medical school and have this guy's medical records. Not us!
 
It is very hard to remove your own limb. Some people with BIID have succeeded in this but it's a lot healthier, a lot safer for a doctor to do it because often taking things into your own hands causes other complications too.
 
dreama said:
It is very hard to remove your own limb. Some people with BIID have succeeded in this but it's a lot healthier, a lot safer for a doctor to do it because often taking things into your own hands causes other complications too.
Click to expand...

And there are reasons that doctors refuse to amputate a limb that doesn't need to be amputated. The reasonable reaction would be to listen to the professionals and not try to remove your own limb with a hack saw. However, if you choose not to listen to the professionals, and are determined to act only on your own without the medical expertise necessary, that is about the only option that is open to you. Your decision.
 
What about go to other countries, such as China to get limb amputated or any developing countries that would perform amputate on limb.
 
Back
Top