The Nantes University Hospital was condemned on Wednesday by the administrative court to pay more than 61,000 euros to a patient for “wrongful breaches” having led to “a total removal of the penis” of the patient, we learned from the court.
The care of the patient, aged 30 in 2014 during the first surgery following a diagnosis of carcinoma (a type of cancer, editor’s note), “was characterized by faulty breaches such as to engage the responsibility of the CHU “Writes the administrative court of Nantes.
The patient’s defense, which claimed nearly a million euros, announced to AFP that it will appeal this decision.
Several damages
The CHU’s error caused the patient to lose “a 70% chance of avoiding recurrence (of the carcinoma) having led to a total removal of the penis” of the patient during new operations in the following years until June 2017, according to the decision of which AFP has knowledge.
A medical expertise has demonstrated the error of the Nantes urologist who did not remove all the cancer cells from his patient. “I have hatred towards this doctor who did not listen to me. He played Russian roulette with me! “, Testifies the victim to France Bleu.
The sum of 61,376 euros that the CHU will have to pay to the patient covers the various damages taken into account by the court, including “the suffering endured” (12,000 euros), the “permanent functional deficit” (16,000 euros) as well as the ” sexual harm” (31,500 euros).
The patient asked the University Hospital for a total sum of 976,000 euros in compensation for the damage suffered. “We are appealing and we will win,” said the victim in a reaction sent by his lawyer. “I will not allow them to humiliate me”.
A “social death” for his lawyer
Referring to the “social death” of his client, the lawyer, Me Georges Parastatis, told AFP: “This man suffered a first psychological death by medical malpractice and a second today by this disparaging judgment for the human dignity “.
“Of course, we are going to appeal in the hope that the Court of Appeal will look at this case in a more humane and not intellectually rigid way,” continued the lawyer.
He regrets that, in the judgment rendered on Wednesday, the “physical and psychological suffering” was taken into account for the compensation requested “only within a strict framework of nomenclatures pre-established by enarques”.