"SO WHY IS THE FDA NOT PUTTING LASIK DOCTORS IN JAIL for
continuing to NOT REPORT ALL INJURED LASIK PATIENTS,
& for violating mandatory FDA and FTC advertising protocols?"
FDA’s own website explains the CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS they
should have been imposing on LASIK SURGEONS since 1996
but for whatever reason, they choose to NOT enforce this law: (Page 9)
"Where is the FDA..."
"I thought that since LASIK was FDA APPROVED that meant
it was safe, proven, and effective..."
"Why are the FDA DIRECTORS/COMPLIANCE not policing and
regulating standard of care and advertising standards to prevent deception
when it comes to LASIK...an elective, not needed surgery?"
"Why is the FDA NOT policing & punishing LASIK doctors?"
"Isn't my tax dollar supposed to fund the FDA which is supposed to look out for me and not the LASIK industry's profits?"
"Is it true that the FDA / CDRH can impose criminal penalties of imprisoning
a LASIK doctor and their staff, for up to (3) years and fine them up to $1 MILLION
"I wasn't able to find a medical malpractice attorney to sue because I signed the Informed Consent Form...And even if I did, I heard it's very hard to win a LASIK case because the jury can't see out of your eyes...it's not like you're missing a limb...so they do not feel your pain and you lose your case!"
-LASIK DOCTORS EVEN SUE THEIR
OWN PATIENTS THEY RUINED-
Dean Andrew Kantis who operates the website www.LifeAfterLasik.com , in order to warn the public that LASIK is dangerous, is very profit-oriented, the Ex Chief of Medical Devices, Dr. Morris Waxler, whom approved LASIK is now AGAINST LASIK, and petitioned the FDA to end the procedure saying it causes a "healthy eye" to become "sick and diseased" and the cornea is permanently scarred and damaged for life! Dean Kantis was sued by his own doctor for $2 million dollars, Nicholas Caro of Saint George Vision in Chicago, because of this page which exposes his doctor's evil / dark side...showing 50+ LASIK LAWSUITS and why his physician should be in jail...stating "MEDICAL CRIMES" and knowingly injuring his own patients: www.LifeAfterLasik.com/nickcarolawsuits.htm .
RETALIATION & LASIK LAWSUITS:
Make no mistake about it informed consent was and is, primarily, a device used for the protection of doctors by doctors. They give it to you to protect themselves from law suits. That's not, obviously, how the document was intended but it, like many well intended things, has had its use perverted by those with a self serving agenda. An old legal axiom "Mere injury, without fault, will not stand" says it all for attorneys practicing in the field of medical malpractice. Simply put, it is not enough that you have been injured as a result of the refractive surgical procedure you have undergone, you must establish, to the standard set by the state in which you were injured, the failure or failures which have resulted in the injuries you have sustained.
Once you have shown that the information provided was insufficient you will have to meet one of three standards to be able to sue:
Who was it who said, "When the tide comes in, all the boats in the harbor go up?"
Ironically, Dr. Marguerite McDonald was one of the first high-profile refractive surgeons to "jump ship" when serious concerns about the safety of the procedure began to surface, “I haven’t done LASIK in three years now."
LASIK malpractice, which is rampant, is not being handled in a manner that proactively prevents adverse events from occurring, and when they do occur, LASIK patients encounter a 'White Wall of Silence' that prevents them from getting any justice, and has led to unprecedented incidences of depression, PTSD, and suicide."
The main problem is the "brotherhood of refractive surgeons"---they will not testify against each other (with very, very few exceptions). This syndrome is also known as the "White Wall of Silence". Also, juries are not sympathetic to patients who have complications from elective surgery.
Not only do the patients who suffer lasik complications have to deal with a medical community which wants to deny our existence, we also run head into the "white wall of silence" because for the most part, none of them want to badmouth their colleagues' work and say that we've been victims of malpractice. They charge us $250, $350 or $500 for a second opinion consultation and tell us that we need psychological help, or we just need to practice using our "new vision" and get on with our lives.