Breast surgeon ‘operated on healthy women to make money’
A LEADING breast surgeon falsely told patients they were at risk of cancer so he could perform needless surgery to earn more money and maintain his reputation, a court heard yesterday.
Consultant Dr Ian Paterson, 59, is accused of performing unnecessary breast removal operations after claiming to have found ‘ticking time bomb’ problems.
His alleged victims included Leanne Joseph, then 25, who was ‘devastated’ by an ‘entirely unnecessary operation’ in 2006, and Carole Johnson, 48, who underwent five operations she did not need. He told another patient, Judith Conduit, 47, that she might have a rare condition and removed both her breasts, leaving her with problems that required 94 follow-up hospital appointments in 12 months.
Paterson carried out operations that ‘no reasonable surgeon would have carried out’, Nottingham Crown Court was told. Prosecutor Julian Christopher QC said the consultant did so for ‘obscure’ motives, including wanting to maintain his image as ‘ a busy surgeon in great demand... at the top of his game’ and to ‘earn extra money’.
The surgeon, who was formerly employed by Heart of England NHS Trust, operated on private patients at his Spire Healthcare practice in the West Midlands. He was known as a busy doctor with an ‘excellent bedside manner’ who instilled ‘complete confidence’ in his patients.
Mr Christopher said Paterson was ‘ extremely experienced and knowledgeable in his field, which makes what happened in this case all the more extraordinary and outrageous’. He told the jury that the surgeon performed operations which he told the patients were necessary, usually on the basis that they ‘ had or were at risk of developing breast cancer’.
The prosecutor said medical professionals often disagreed on the correct course of treatment for a patient. But in this case they were operations ‘which no reasonable surgeon at the time would have considered justified’, the court heard. Paterson frequently misrepresented the results of tests to patients and their GPs and often charged for more expensive operations than the ones he carried out, it was alleged.
He also told patients after treatment that there was a ‘residual risk’ of cancer returning, allowing him to charge them for months of check-ups. And he exaggerated the treatment his patients needed to their insurers, who often footed their medical bills.
Mr Christopher said: ‘Shocking though it may seem, Mr Paterson was lying to patients and to their GPs, and in some instances to a colleague as well, about the patient’s condition... exaggerating or quite simply inventing risks of cancer.
‘As a result, those patients and their families lived for many years with the belief that they could be very ill. [They] underwent exten- sive, life-changing operations for no medically justifiable reason. Some have consequently developed serious mental health problems.’
In 2001, Patricia Welch, 48, was told by the doctor that getting breast cancer was ‘only a matter of time’ and a ‘ticking time bomb’. This resulted in her undergoing preventative mastectomy and reconstruction, which resulted in ‘considerable complications’.
Mrs Conduit had a needless double mastectomy and reconstructive surgery in 2001. During one operation she developed a blood clot and was under anaesthetic for almost 12 hours. She counted 94 hospital appointments in the ensuing year, averaging one every four days.
Dr Rosemary Platt, herself a GP, underwent a full mastectomy at the age of 47 in 1997, after Paterson misreported the status of her breast tissue. Mr Christopher said: ‘This was a six-hour operation, requiring a blood transfusion, and with painful after effects. As [Paterson] would have known it was quite unnecessary... done intentionally... constituting the removal of Dr Platt’s right breast.’
Another alleged victim, John Ingram, was 42 in 2006 when Paterson told him he was ‘on the road to cancer’. He underwent a rare male double mastectomy that he did not need.
Paterson, dressed in a black suit, was accompanied by his daughter as he arrived for the first day of his trial yesterday.
He is accused of 20 counts of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm on nine women and one man. The surgeon, from Altrincham, Greater Manchester, denies all the charges. The trial, which is expected to last ten weeks, continues.