A doctor was sentenced to 3 years in prison, suspended for 3 years, for performing a preventive mastectomy on a patient without her even having a genetic predisposition to cancer.
The Mixed Jury Court of Appeal of Thessaloniki found the surgeon-physician guilty of aggravated bodily harm, with possible malice, to the degree of a misdemeanor, upon conversion of the charge from felony aggravated bodily harm. In addition, the Court granted him two mitigating factors – subsequent good behavior and sincere remorse. He was originally sentenced to 5 years in prison.
The case started in 2018 in a town in Central Macedonia, with the complainant being a 60-year-old (now) woman who, due to a family history of breast cancer, regularly underwent screening tests. According to her, in the autumn of that year, calcifications were detected on her breasts and the accused doctor allegedly recommended that she undergo gene testing for hereditary cancer predisposition.
According to her complaint, the doctor informed her that the genetic test had come back positive, so she immediately performed a preventive double mastectomy. Having complete trust in the doctor, with whom she maintained friendly relations, she did not ask to see the results and underwent the surgery within a few days, the 60-year-old sufferer testified in court. After the surgery, she experienced serious complications – a condition she said led to the removal of the implants and months of suffering, and had to undergo further medical interventions.
According to her complaint, after the serious health issues, she contacted the Research Centre responsible for the gene testing, where she was informed that the test had never been carried out, even though she testified that she had paid the accused doctor the sum of 800 euros. After she finally went ahead with the test, the results were negative, which, according to her, if she had known in advance, she would not have carried out this ‘irreversible operation, which is an act of amputation’, as she said. “I had made up my mind that if the gene test was positive, I would have the mastectomy,” she testified, describing the adventure she experienced that left scars on both her body and her psychology.
In his apology, the doctor denied the charge, stressing that the decision to perform the preventive mastectomy was medically “correct” and was taken jointly with the complainant. Her family history, her age and calcifications were – according to him – the factors that convinced the woman to undergo the operation. “The aesthetic aspect also played a role,” he added, while denying the woman’s allegations regarding the gene testing at the Research Centre. “Most colleagues would have acted in the same way,” he said, defending his medical actions, stressing that the whole affair had affected him psychologically.
It should be noted that the 60-year-old woman appealed the case to the civil courts, which vindicated her, awarding her compensation.
