Why All the Negative Doctor Posts Without Stating Their Names?
Dr. Rassman. I have noticed that you have a fair amount of threads about bad transplant surgeons such as this one here, but you never say the doctor’s name. What is the point in posting this unless you mention the Doctor’s name so patients in the future will stay clear of this doctor and others? Without mentioning the doctor’s name, other patients will be subject to his horrible results.
I would love to mention the doctors’ names, but that would almost certainly bring me into court, something that I do not wish to spend my life doing (it might bring me to the brink of financial ruin with large lawyer fees just to prove what I said). I get angry when I see the mess created by many of these doctors, but alas, you must use the information in ways to become a knowledgeable buyer, so I use this blog to call people’s attention to what they need to look for when engaging a doctor’s service for a hair transplant.
In 1994, at a medical meeting that easily had 400 physician in the audience, I rose to the microphone and openly referred to the sleaze in this business, with doctors low balling patients and deforming them without telling them the risks to hair transplantation (giving them proper informed consent). The surgical results before 1994 were often deforming and pluggy. These, in hindsight, were very substandard when compared to today’s artfully performed hair transplants. Many doctors would not enter the business to perform hair transplants because of the deforming nature of the surgery at that time. One doctor, in particular, was my target and when I exemplified this sleazy, dishonest doctor without mentioning his name (I called him a “crook” in the true sense of the word), the audience responded with a standing ovation for my being so outspoken, echoing my message. At the end of the session, I was surrounded by many doctors congratulating me on my outspoken comment. One doctor (the one whose name was never mentioned) waited for the crowd to clear and approached me with great anger, saying that he did not appreciate my calling him a crook. As I never mentioned his name, I said “If the shoe fits, wear it” and walked away.
Hi DrRassman
I enjoyed reading this particular post on your blog. It reaffirmed my belief in your integrity.
However, principal task to be that of testifying to the persistence of such conditions in the audience of doctors does little, and thereby, at best, retaining the status quo ,with adding anecdote of courageous doctor who spoke up against such conditions.
IMO the above mentioned audience, such structure, had little interest in in the past,in specific individuals,patients, and had ,business soul, within which individuals were categorized, subsumed, and governed by , economic criteria.
But what about the possibility that such conditions might be changed for the better?
For that to be achieved, change of audience is needed. People, some soon to be HT patients, can learn about one another in terms that move beyond propositional knowledge, …that is rather than merely learning stories, knowledge is gained through openness to disruptive knowledge. Knowledge can be disruptive in the sense that new information can transform one’s perceived experience and understanding.
Such knowledge is built up reducing the abstraction of distant others, the stories without names, transforming them into concrete.
That is possible without exposing one self to be sued.
By giving a victim a chance to go to Court and present a case with the instrument of affidavit of merit .
Ironically, for the elusive “crookâ€, his strict concern for covering …and his weapon for kicking …. (With frivolous litigation against outspoken doctor) runs no real risk for the outspoken doctor when he just gives victim such affidavit of merit. That victim then would proceed to discovery and proof in front of a jury and let me tell you knowledge of human social action…even such requiring understanding of Hair Transplant procedure, is very possible , of which human beings and that jury are themselves a part.
They will see ,hear, both sides …and bring verdict.
But no case ever gets to the jury.
As far as I know, No HT surgeon ever signed such affidavit of merit, although such abuse of HT patients rights exist through the decades.
Signing such affidavit for a butchered soul does not bring standing ovations, nor makes anecdotes, but brings something real. It brings a precedent, and with that change that you wish to see.
I exclude my self so there is no misunderstanding.
Not for my self.I do not want affidavit of merit.Not any more.
For the next.
There will be next.Will there be a Doctor to stand behind him?
As always my best regards,
John 36
John 36-
You have WAAAAY too much time on your hands.
We all have only one kind of time on our hands Ben.Life time.