US woman sues after 'gender affirming' double mastectomy

[ArabellaScott]

'The defendants 'transgressed the bounds of socially tolerable conduct by abusing their positions of trust and authority' by recommending 'unnecessary, irreversible treatment' without weighing Kiefel's mental problems, says the complaint.

Because of the surgery, Kiefel must endure a 'lifelong inability ever to choose to breastfeed a child' and doubts she will ever find a 'life partner sexually and romantically attracted to a woman without breasts,' it adds.

Kiefel has called for a jury trial and seeks up to $850,000 in damages.'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11399015/Oregon-woman-sues-trans-care-team-abhorrent-misdiagnosis-left-MUTILATED.html

Brace yourselves. The lawsuits are starting.

Kiefel is supported by WoLF: womensliberationfront.org/supporting-detrans-women

I'm only amazed at the low figure of $850k, thought these kind of things were in the millions.
I must say when I read this kind of story I feel rather annoyed. No doubt this person would have sued the relevant parties had they refused to do the surgery. Surely there is paperwork prior to these unneccessary surgeries to say that it is the informed wish of the patient etc? One good thing about this may be that surgeons and doctors may now distance themselves from this trans ideology and refuse to consider such cases.

Getting the lawsuit popcorn ready. Not to trivialise this type of suit, it's horrific, but because there's going to be a lot of them - especially if she wins.

However lifelong inability ever to choose to breastfeed a child' this struck me as odd/tenuous. Women don't have a lifelong ability to breastfeed do they? Plus many women don't have the choice in the US because they have to return to work full-time before they've even stopped bleeding. While others just can't, for no known reason. The wording of this sounds a bit "loose". I hope the rest is tight as hell, because I want her to win.

Only $850,000? That surprised me.

lifelong inability ever to choose to breastfeed a child'

I suppose it's another way of saying she will never breastfeed.

Me too.

We're now at putting a price on breastfeeding though...and we all know how much women are valued.

It's not just the effect on her ability to breastfeed, though. She's had complications, pain, and the mental effects are not negligable, either.

It does seem a low amount.

Two video consultations for someone to be approved for an elective double mastectomy?? Wow. I can't see how this clinic could justify that as taking appropriate care of someone with obviously complex mental health issues.

The issue, surely, is a woman presenting with distress over her body and the solution being offered/suggested is surgery.

It's equivalent to anorexics being offered bariatric surgery.

This is a bit of a tangent, an article about surgery to increase the height of people (principly men) who think the are too short. There were a couple of bits that stood out. One surgeon who has his patients assessed and will not treat those who seem to have body dymorphia. I suspect he's probably a minority but this, imo, should be the minimum requirement for elective treatments. And the words at the end from a man who underwent the procedure but still wishes he hadn't felt it necessary because of how society treats short men. I think those wishes should be extended to all people who don't or can't conform to society's expectations.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/nov/09/would-you-have-your-legs-broken-to-make-yourself-taller-the-men-who-go-through-hell-for-a-little-extra-height

All the best to Kiefal, I hope, succeed or fail, she drags this into the light. If it makes just one therapist think twice or saves just one person. It will never compensate for what she's been through but might ameliorate the pain a little.

Thank you for sharing Arabella.

It is heartbreaking that the detransitioners have to do this. It is very brave to make a stand against the poor quality care that has been allowed to happen for this group of patients.

I suspect the lifelong inability to breastfeed shows a loss that is beyond “cosmetic” and cannot be remedied.

You could argue that the appearance related aspects can be improved with implants etc but you can’t fix the loss of function.

It's the fact that it's backed up by ideology which needs the scrutiny. Plenty of people have body dysphoria, and I'm quite certain they aren't all recommended for surgery. Because it's acknowledged that it's a mental condition.

She thought she was trans. She was treated as though this is an actual thing.

The irreversible nature of the surgery is one thing, but it's the reasons why she was recommended to have it in the first place that needs looking at.

Yes.

This is the problem - when they're wanting to transition, it's legitimate, and no they're not mentally ill how dare you suggest such a thing.
Then, once transitioned, should they decide to detransition, suddenly it's oh yes of course it's a mental illness, and now I'm going to sue because I never ever thought I might change my mind.
Being trans is either a mental illness or it's not, you can't have it both ways.
If I got a tattoo and then changed my mind about it, how far would I get if I sued the tattoo artist for disfiguring my body ffs 🙄

So she asked for the surgery or they unprompted told her to have it?
Also think if she hadnt been given it she would have sued, but hopefully this will deter other medical staff from agreeing to do this.

'Camille’s legal claims include:

1. Professional malpractice – breach of the duty of care that mental health professionals owe to an individual client;

2. Intentional infliction of emotional distress; and

3. Fraud.

Camille alleges that the mental health professionals who claimed to evaluate and diagnose her ignored her history of trauma and her extensive medical and mental health issues, instead “affirming” her belief in having a “non-binary identity” and urging her to pursue “chest reconstruction” surgery as the path to self-actualization.

Camille is alleging damages, injuries, and harms in the form of emotional distress, financial losses (such as not being able to work), and physical injuries resulting from an unnecessary double mastectomy surgery performed to “affirm” the misguided belief that adopting a “non-binary” identity would resolve her medical and psychological health needs.'

womensliberationfront.org/supporting-detrans-women

'Camille is suing four defendants in her lawsuit: a licensed clinical social worker and a licensed professional counselor, each of whom claimed to “evaluate” Camille and recommended her for double mastectomy surgery to “affirm” her “non-binary identity,” and the two health care clinics that employ these mental health professionals; both clinics claim to specialize in helping the “LGBTQ” community.'

same link as above

'[Camille] deeply resents and regrets that she was misled into believing that harming her body in pursuit of a “gender identity” held the answers for her anxiety, depression, and self-doubts.

She hopes to hold mental health professionals (and the clinics who employ them) accountable for misdiagnosing her and facilitating a medical procedure that has left Camille feeling physically and emotionally mutilated.'

Would Camille still sue if there was no money involved and it was just for the legal precedent?

Tattoo artists aren't Doctors, though I wonder about the liability for more 'out there' body modifications which, I suspect, the majority won't touch.

Do they have rules about facial tattoos? Genuine question.

They aren't permitted to tattoo under 18s.

I think they can be sued if they screw up. It's being alleged these 'Doctors' screwed up. She wasn't trans, she was mentally ill. A mental health practitioner should be expected to notice that before recommending irreversible surgery.

She thought she was trans. She was treated as though this is an actual thing.

'Trans' does seem to be something which cannot be defined. What is it? Since we are told that very young children can 'be trans', this must be something which is comprehensible even to those young children, and yet none of the advocates for trans being a real thing seem able to offer any sort of definition of what 'trans' is.

I’ve been saying for a while that there’s going to be a flood of legal cases from people who regret what has been allowed to happen to them, particularly children/young adults who look back in horror when they grow up and ask “Why didn’t you protect me?”

I saw that headline and thought “So it begins”.

If it's a mental illness, they should be having treatment for that mental illness, not being fast-tracked to mutilating surgery or other physical treatment such as hormones or hormone blockers.

If it's not a mental illness, what sort of illness do they have which requires surgery? If their body is healthy, they don't have a physical illness, so the surgery is cosmetic surgery and should be viewed the in same way as any other cosmetic surgery.

Are there any other possibilities of what 'trans' might be? Possibly only the belief system which says that people can be literally 'born in the wrong body'. Which should be treated the same way as any other belief system which has no basis in science.

So now there is one suit in Australia, Ritchie's here in the UK and one that we know of in the USA.

I suspect that it will depend on the outcomes of these suits but I do expect there will be quite a few. And that may be one of the only ways to stop this 'affirming only' treatment plans. The fact that it has been pushed onto clinicians the way it has, will have to have significant ramifications.

As Joanne Rowling said, (which echoes what has long been said here and elsewhere), this is medical scandal and it will be used as case study material for many disciplines in the future.