your uterus

[Guest guest]

This morning I awoke to read Cheryl Truman's column, " Use your uterus

for fun and profit " with great interest

(http://www.kentucky.com/mld/heraldleader/news/local/5080751.htm) and

found it distasteful, disrespectful, and as unnecessary as the branding

done by Dr. Mike Guiler.

As a layperson who has watched ~100 surgical videos of hysterectomy,

studied the surgical textbooks on laparoscopy and hysterectomy, read

nearly every piece of medical literature ever written on the

hysterectomy, and who annually attends the American Association of

Gynecological Laparoscopists' national conferences (where even more

videos are on display each year), I have NEVER seen or read about the

type of extensive (not to mention personal) branding done by Dr. Guiler.

NEVER. While the public continues to make fun of the Means for their

lawsuit and diminishes the pain and anguish they feel over this, the

reality is simple: Mrs. Means was disrespected and her body

unnecessarily mutilated during surgery.

In this nation there are many, many women who avoid medical care because

they fear the lack of respect which goes on in the operating room. They

know that surgery means entrusting their very life in the hands of the

surgeon and without that trust they often cannot gain the courage to go

through with what may be a necessary and life saving surgery. This case

has fueled the fears of a great many women in this nation who will now

continue avoiding gynecological medical care. It did our organization

no favors and made the job of coaxing women into trusting surgeons again

much, much harder. ly, my own fears of surgery were also fueled by

this case and I can certainly identify with every woman who has called

or emailed our organization in the past week with concerns about how to

find a doctor they can truly " trust " won't do something like this to

their body while they are under anesthesia and unable to prevent the

mutilation.

Given that Ms. Truman didn't even know what a uterus looked like prior

to this, underwent a hysterectomy with the woefully mistaken notion that

it was only a baby production factory, and clearly has no knowledge of

what is required and what is NOT during a surgery of this nature, the

commentary in this column was out of line. The sniggering comments of

Ms. Truman over this case are highly indicative of a lack of respect and

disregard for the human body. But it's not funny. It's disgraceful.

Cheryl Truman owes the Means and the public an apology.

Finally, as a point of law, it is indeed against the law to mutilate a

corpse and families have been known to sue for this even though the dead

person certainly " feels " nothing and receives no compensation for the

damage.

The Commonwealth of Kentucky provides for protection of a corpse under

KRS 525.120:

(1) A person is guilty of abuse of a corpse when except as

authorized by law he intentionally treats a corpse in a way that

would outrage ordinary family sensibilities.

(2) Abuse of a corpse is a Class A misdemeanor, unless the act

attempted or committed involved sexual intercourse or deviate sexual

intercourse with the corpse, in which case it is a Class D felony.

So, it would seem that in the great state of Kentucky there is more

respect for the body AFTER one is dead than BEFORE.

--

Carla Dionne

Executive Director

National Uterine Fibroids Foundation

PO Box 9688

Colorado Springs, CO 80909